Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
National Director of Public Prosecutions v Mogotlane and Others (2023-028928) [2025] ZAGPPHC 786 (1 August 2025)
The High Court dismissed a procedural application to compel under rule 35(12) and confirmed a restraint order against specified defendants and a respondent.
Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Unemployment Insurance Fund and Others (2020/26468) [2025] ZAGPPHC 345 (26 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against an order striking out the defence for discovery non-compliance, finding no reasonable prospects of success.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Mokgotho and Another (37787/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 277 (20 March 2025)
The High Court struck out the first respondent’s defence for non-compliance with discovery, granted default judgment to Standard Bank, and authorised execution against the bonded property.
Ewels v Francis and Others (Leave to Appeal) (6497/2022) [2025] ZAWCHC 113 (17 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed leave to appeal against an interlocutory discovery order, finding no appealability and no reasonable prospects of success.
Body Corporate of Valleyview Centre v Queen New York Cosmetic (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) (Reasons) (2023/070664) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1300 (20 December 2024)
The court held that the filing of a notice in terms of rule 35(12) does not suspend the time period for filing an answering affidavit in application proceedings. The respondent was required to either file its affidavit or seek an extension of time under rule 27. The applicant was entitled to set the matter down on the unopposed motion roll, and this did not constitute an irregular step under rule 30A. The respondent's arguments to the contrary were dismissed, and the respondent was not entitled to a costs order in its favour. The court exercised its discretion to grant the respondent a furthe…
Source excerpt
MEC for Education North West and Another v Engelbrecht and Others (2516/2022) [2024] ZANWHC 208 (13 November 2024)
The court held that the delivery of a notice of bar by the respondents was not an irregular step, as the Uniform Rules do not provide that a Rule 35(14) notice suspends the time for pleading. The Department ought to have applied for an extension of time to plead or to file its application to compel discovery. The Department's reliance on Sanniegraan was misplaced, as the weight of authority supports the view that the dies for pleading are not suspended by a Rule 35(14) notice. The application to declare the notice of bar irregular was dismissed, but the Department was granted a further ten da…
Source excerpt
Taskflow (Pty) Ltd v Aluxium (Pty) Ltd and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2021/40976) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1294 (25 October 2024)
The court held that the discovery order compelling the applicants to disclose computer software is appealable, as its effect is final and definitive of the parties' rights and is not susceptible to alteration by the trial court. The interests of justice require that the order be appealable, given its broad impact on the trial and the relevance of the discovery sought. The applicants established reasonable prospects of success and compelling reasons for leave to appeal, satisfying the requirements of section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted to the Full…
Source excerpt
Nene v Auditor-General of South Africa and Others (6136/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1094 (25 October 2024)
The court found that the Auditor-General had complied with rule 53 by providing all documents that served before the decision-maker at the time of the impugned decisions. The applicant's request for additional documents was overbroad and sought materials extraneous to the record of proceedings. Discovery under rule 35 was premature as pleadings had not closed and relevance could not be properly assessed. Regarding the PAIA request, the applicant failed to exhaust internal remedies and did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify direct recourse to the court. Accordingly, the appli…
Source excerpt
Sakeliga NPC v Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs and Others (132918/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 885 (12 September 2024)
The court held that the applicant's interpretation of clause 13.10.2 of the Practice Manual was incorrect. The necessary directions contemplated by the clause pertain only to the future conduct of the matter and do not empower the court to grant substantive relief such as compelling the respondents to upload documents. The Practice Manual does not override the Uniform Rules of Court, and any request for document production must be made in terms of Rule 35(12), subject to the court's direction under Rule 35(13). The applicant's attempt to bypass the established procedure was improper. The appl…
Source excerpt
Bara and Another v Nedbank Limited (5345/2022) [2024] ZAECMHC 52 (13 June 2024)
The High Court dismissed leave to appeal against a costs order, finding no exceptional circumstances and no basis to interfere with its discretion.
Explore more
