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
Watt v Malobola and Others (LCC83/2023) [2025] ZALCC 9 (17 February 2025)
The Land Court granted condonation and rescission, discharged a confirmed rule nisi, and allowed the applicant to file answering papers out of time.
Greensek (Pty) Ltd v De Jager and Others (5201/2018) [2022] ZAFSHC 177 (19 July 2022)
The High Court stayed execution and cancelled a sale in execution pending interpleader proceedings over disputed attached assets, finding the matter urgent.
Sheriff of the High Court, Humansdorp v FirstRand Bank Ltd and Others (3312/2011) [2013] ZAECPEHC 13 (26 February 2013)
Interpleader proceedings over attached goods were referred for oral evidence because the correct claimants were not properly reflected and ownership could not be decided on paper.
Sheriff of the High Court for the District of Molopo v Firstrand Bank Ltd and Others, In re: Firstrand Bank Ltd v Tshepe and Another, Firstrand Bank Ltd v Segalo NO and Others (1416/11, 1416/12) [2013] ZANWHC 1 (11 January 2013)
The court found that the interpleader proceedings were the proper remedy for the Sheriff to resolve the dispute over the property, as FRB asserted the sale to the Naraghis was void while the Naraghis sought transfer. The procedural defects raised by FRB were cured and did not prejudice any party. The Sheriff's conduct in re-auctioning the property was in accordance with the conditions of sale, which allow for re-auction in the event of dispute or mistake. FRB failed to demonstrate any prejudice suffered as a result of the Sheriff's actions, and neither Mr & Mrs Tshepe nor Mr Ackerman, who wer…
Source excerpt
Joubert v Human and Another; (1149/00) [2003] ZANCHC 47 (14 November 2003)
The court found that the judgment creditor, DJ Human, was aware of the interpleader proceedings and did not take any steps to disclaim interest in the attached property or to avoid participation. The fact that he was not formally cited as a claimant was immaterial, as he was ipso facto a claimant by virtue of the execution process. The claimants had substantiated their claims both before and during the proceedings, and the judgment creditor's passive stance did not absolve him from cost liability. Justice required that the successful claimants' costs be borne by the judgment creditor, who was…
Source excerpt
Explore more
