South Africa Case Law

Global Connect Trading (Pty) Ltd and Others v South African Securitisation Programme and Others (3198/2022)

Global Connect Trading (Pty) Ltd and Others v South African Securitisation Programme and Others (3198/2022) [2025] ZAFSHC 168 (12 June 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3198/2022

Judges

Loubser, Chesiwe, Ntanga

The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to establish any bona fide defence or triable issue to resist summary judgment. The court found that the deponent to the summary judgment affidavit, as litigation manager with direct access to relevant records, satisfied the requirements of rule 32. The alleged illegibility of the rental agreement did not prevent the appellants from pleading fully, and thus did not constitute a valid defence. The purported cancellation of the agreement was not effected in accordance with the contractual terms and was invalid. The defence of force majeure…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Force Majeure
• Impossibility Of Performance
• Contract Termination
• Guarantee Liability

Knowledge Objects Healthcare (Pty) Ltd v Inani Prop Holding (Leave to Appeal) (2024/014083)

Knowledge Objects Healthcare (Pty) Ltd v Inani Prop Holding (Leave to Appeal) (2024/014083) [2025] ZAGPPHC 537 (28 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024/014083

Judge

Lesufi

The court found that the affidavit deposed by Mr Ramsamy on behalf of the respondent complied with Rule 32(2)(a) of the Uniform Rules of Court. The deponent's position and statements in the affidavit were sufficient to establish personal knowledge of the facts, the cause of action, and the amount claimed. The court distinguished the FirstRand Bank Ltd v Beyers precedent, noting that the facts in Beyers were materially different and did not apply to the present matter. The court held that none of the grounds advanced by the applicant demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal, and…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Lease Agreement
• Personal Knowledge Affidavit
• Costs Order

Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v D G Tyres (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another (18696/2022)

Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v D G Tyres (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another (18696/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 422 (9 May 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

18696/2022

Judge

R B Mkhabela

Summary judgment was granted against the surety after the court found no bona fide defence to liability under two instalment sale agreements.

• Suretyship
• Summary Judgment
• Instalment Sale Agreement
• Liquidation
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Contractual Liability

First National Bank v MMD Fitment Centre CC and Others

First National Bank v MMD Fitment Centre CC and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 138; 633/18 (1 March 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

633/18

Judge

MPN Mbongwe

The High Court dismissed First National Bank’s summary judgment application, holding that the right had lapsed under the old Rule 32 and condonation was required.

• Summary Judgment
• Condonation
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Procedural Delay
• Irregular Step
• Summary-judgment

Nedbank Limited v Tshoga (55936/2020)

Nedbank Limited v Tshoga (55936/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 196 (25 March 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

55936/2020

Judge

S.S. Madiba

Summary judgment was granted to Nedbank in a vehicle finance dispute after the court rejected jurisdictional, reckless lending, and technical affidavit objections.

• Credit Agreements
• Reckless Lending
• Summary Judgment
• Jurisdiction
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Contract Enforcement

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Phalane and Another (2019/25638)

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Phalane and Another (2019/25638) [2022] ZAGPJHC 69 (7 February 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2019/25638

Judge

L C Abrahams

The High Court refused a bank’s summary judgment and execution application over a home loan dispute, finding triable issues about the amount advanced, fees, and interest.

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Home Loan Agreement
• Mortgage Bond
• Condonation
• Costs Award

T-Systems (Pty) Ltd v BDM Technology Services (Pty) Ltd and Others; In re BDM Technology Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v T-Systems (Pty) Ltd (2019/39986)

T-Systems (Pty) Ltd v BDM Technology Services (Pty) Ltd and Others; In re BDM Technology Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v T-Systems (Pty) Ltd (2019/39986) [2020] ZAGPJHC 243 (7 October 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2019/39986

Judge

Siwendu

High Court held that objections to a summary judgment application were substantive, not procedural, and could not be pursued under Rule 30.

• Summary Judgment
• Irregular Proceedings
• Insolvency Act Section 46
• Set Off
• Liquidation
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules

Dikopane Project Management v Empfuleni Local Municipality (67235/2019)

Dikopane Project Management v Empfuleni Local Municipality (67235/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 259 (4 June 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

67235/2019

Judge

P H Malungana

Summary judgment was granted for payment under a fuel supply contract. The court held that the arbitration clause did not oust jurisdiction and no bona fide defence was shown.

• Summary Judgment
• Arbitration Clause
• Contractual Performance
• Jurisdiction
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Summary-judgment

GWK Limited v Viljoen N.O. and Others (2304/2017)

GWK Limited v Viljoen N.O. and Others (2304/2017) [2017] ZAECGHC 82 (13 July 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

2304/2017

Judge

NG Beshe

The court held that the plaintiff's affidavit, although using the wording "I verily believe", is compliant with Rule 32(2) as interpreted by the Full Bench in Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Carports for Africa CC and Others. The distinction between "belief" and "opinion" is immaterial, and the substance of the affidavit meets the requirements. The defendants' point in limine was dismissed. As no opposing affidavit or application for condonation was filed, and no bona fide defence was disclosed, summary judgment was granted in favour of the plaintiff as prayed.

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Affidavit Requirements
• Point In Limine

Magnum Packaging (Pty) Ltd v Franchising To Africa (Pty) Ltd (13306/17)

Magnum Packaging (Pty) Ltd v Franchising To Africa (Pty) Ltd (13306/17) [2017] ZAGPPHC 459 (28 June 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

13306/17

Judge

Malungana

Summary judgment was refused where the plaintiff could not clearly identify the liable defendant and the defendants disclosed arguable defences under Rule 32.

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Contractual Liability
• Defective Goods
• Counterclaim
• Citation Of Parties