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
Road Accident Fund v Harmse (23540/2017) [2025] ZAGPPHC 545 (20 May 2025)
High Court refused rescission and condonation, finding the Road Accident Fund was represented in court and its false factual allegations justified attorney-and-client costs.
Minister of Police v Rafiki (2630/2012) [2025] ZAGPPHC 323 (25 March 2025)
The court found that service of the amendment application was properly effected on the State Attorney's office, as evidenced by the date stamp on the notice of set-down and the subsequent delivery of the complete set of papers. The applicant's denial of receipt was not plausible given the documentary evidence and the chronology of events. The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in seeking rescission, as it must have become aware of the order by at least 7 March 2022 when the endorsed order and amended answers were served. The application for rescission was there…
Source excerpt
Road Accident Fund v Sekgala (752/2015) [2025] ZALMPPHC 51 (14 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed the Road Accident Fund’s rescission bid, finding no reasonable explanation for default and no bona fide defence to the default judgment.
Masebebalo v Matenji (53948/21) [2025] ZAGPJHC 271 (13 March 2025)
The High Court granted rescission under Rule 42(1)(a), finding the prior order was made in the applicants’ absence and affected disputed property rights.
Borene v SA Taxi Impact Fund (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Another (6989/2022) [2025] ZALMPPHC 43 (13 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a default judgment, finding the applicant failed to prove fraud or meet the requirements of Rule 42(1)(a).
Canon South Africa (Proprietary) Limited v Educor Holdings (Proprietart) Limited (005025/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 149 (6 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed Educor’s rescission application, holding that its notice of intention to defend was invalid and default judgment was not granted in error.
Precision Towing (Pty) Ltd t/a Precision Tow-In v Hanekom (101450/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 14 (13 January 2025)
The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving the requirements for rescission under Rule 42(1)(a) or at common law. Although the applicant was not physically present when the order was granted, its absence was elective, not precluded, as it chose not to oppose the application despite being aware of the proceedings and relief sought. The applicant did not provide a reasonable explanation for its default, nor did it demonstrate that the judgment was erroneously granted or that there was any fraudulent misrepresentation or withholding of material facts. The applicant…
Source excerpt
SB Guarantee Company (RF) Pty Ltd v Richardson and Another (Variation) (93741/20) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1385 (9 December 2024)
The High Court varied its earlier order under Rule 42(1)(b) to correct an omission and specify the amount for which an immovable property was declared executable.
Road Accident Fund v Rossouw (Application for Rescission) (9403/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1235 (28 November 2024)
The High Court dismissed the Road Accident Fund’s Rule 42(1)(a) rescission and variation application, finding the relevant orders were not granted in its absence.
P.N v T.N and Others (2021/31102) [2024] ZAGPJHC 814 (14 August 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a divorce order under Rule 42, finding no basis to treat the order as erroneously granted.
Explore more
