South Africa Case Law

Siemens Ltd. v Offshore Marine Engineering (277/92)

Siemens Ltd. v Offshore Marine Engineering (277/92) [1993] ZASCA 87; 1993 (3) SA 913 (AD); [1993] 2 All SA 437 (A) (28 May 1993)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

277/92

Judges

Hoexter, Vivier, Eksteen, F H Grosskopf, Van Coller

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that South African law and practice, as established by a long and largely uniform chain of decisions, require both a recognised ratio jurisdictionis and arrest or attachment to found jurisdiction where both plaintiff and defendant are peregrini of the division. The court rejected the argument that a local peregrinus should be treated as an incola of the Republic for purposes of attachment, finding such a position artificial and legally inaccurate. The court affirmed rule (c) as enunciated by Nienaber AJA in Ewing McDonald, and declined to interfere with the en…

Source excerpt

• Attachment Ad Fundandam Jurisdictionem
• Peregrinus Jurisdiction
• Ratio Jurisdictionis
• Roman Dutch Law Practice

Magida v Minister of Police (99/86)

Magida v Minister of Police (99/86) [1986] ZASCA 94; [1987] 1 All SA 218 (A) (18 September 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

99/86

Judges

Jansen, Joubert, Viljoen, Boshoff, Nestadt

The court held that an impecunious peregrinus should not be forced to furnish security for costs, and the security application was dismissed.

• Security For Costs
• Peregrinus
• Judicial Discretion
• Cautio Juratoria
• Impecuniosity
• Roman Dutch Law Practice