South Africa Case Law

ENRC Mozambique Limitada v Riverland Holdings Limited (42562/2015)

ENRC Mozambique Limitada v Riverland Holdings Limited (42562/2015) [2025] ZAGPJHC 326 (27 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

42562/2015

Judge

Nico van der Walt

The court found that ENRC failed to challenge the authority of Mr Gomes in accordance with Rule 7(1) and that all evidence supported his authorisation to act for Riverland Holdings Limited. The arguments regarding disputes of fact were rejected as ENRC's deponents lacked personal knowledge of the relevant facts. The application to vary the order under Rule 42 was dismissed because the order was already subject to the in duplum rule and there was no patent error, omission, or common mistake. Both applications were found to have no prospects of success and were dismissed with costs.

Source excerpt

• Specific Performance
• Oral Contract
• Authority Of Litigant
• Rule 7 Challenge
• In Duplum Rule

Magotsi v Magotsi N.O and Others (2604/2024)

Magotsi v Magotsi N.O and Others (2604/2024) [2025] ZAECQBHC 6 (4 March 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

2604/2024

Judge

Ronaasen

The High Court dismissed a Rule 7(1) challenge to a trustee’s authority, finding a valid trust resolution authorising opposition and attorneys, with punitive costs.

• Authority To Act
• Trustee Powers
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Resolution Of Trustees
• Rule-7-challenge
• Trustee-powers

King Sabatha Dalindyebo Municipality v Bhekezantsi (2088/2024)

King Sabatha Dalindyebo Municipality v Bhekezantsi (2088/2024) [2024] ZAECMHC 88 (24 October 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

2088/2024

Judge

Mhambi

The court found that the Municipality failed to provide sufficient proof of authority to institute proceedings, as a letter from its legal adviser does not constitute a council resolution or written delegation. The Municipality acts through its council, and authority to litigate must be properly conferred. The Respondent's challenge under Rule 7(1) was upheld, as the Municipality did not object to the timing of the notice in its papers and thus impliedly consented to its consideration. The court granted the Municipality leave to supplement its founding affidavit and amend its notice of motion…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Authority To Litigate
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Council Resolution Requirement
• Illegal Structure Interdict

Transasia 1 (Pty) Ltd v Nhlanhleni Community Property Trust (632/2022)

Transasia 1 (Pty) Ltd v Nhlanhleni Community Property Trust (632/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 753 (18 April 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

632/2022

Judge

DM Leathern

The court dismissed Transasia 1’s interlocutory challenge to the trust’s authority, holding the Rule 7 objection was out of time and condonation was not sought.

• Authority Of Attorney
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Condonation
• Costs Order
• Rule-7
• Authority-of-attorney

Masithela N.O. and Others v Master of the High Court Pretoria and Others (60899/2021)

Masithela N.O. and Others v Master of the High Court Pretoria and Others (60899/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 287 (19 March 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

60899/2021

Judge

P J Vermeulen

The court found that the Winter Cereal Trust was incapacitated from acting in litigation due to having fewer than the minimum number of trustees required by its trust deed. The applicants, acting as trustees, could not lawfully institute proceedings or mandate attorneys without a properly constituted trustee body and valid resolutions. The purported authority given to Bokwa Law Incorporated was invalid, and the applicants failed to demonstrate compliance with the trust deed or joint action as required by law. The notice of substitution of parties was defective, as it was filed after the comme…

Source excerpt

• Trustee Authority
• Joinder And Substitution
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Rule 30a Application
• Trust Deed Interpretation
• Costs Orders

AT & T Transport and Group of Companies (Pty) Ltd v Government Employees Pension Fund (Leave to Appeal) (M117/2022)

AT & T Transport and Group of Companies (Pty) Ltd v Government Employees Pension Fund (Leave to Appeal) (M117/2022) [2023] ZANWHC 169 (10 August 2023)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M117/2022

Judge

Petersen

The court dismissed condonation for a late application for leave to appeal, finding the explanation poor and the founding affidavit silent on prospects of success.

• Condonation
• Leave To Appeal
• Locus Standi
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Leave-to-appeal
• Civil-procedure

JS Van De Merwe Boedery CC v Weshoek Beleggings (Pty) Ltd and Others (29142/2018)

JS Van De Merwe Boedery CC v Weshoek Beleggings (Pty) Ltd and Others (29142/2018) [2023] ZAGPPHC 636 (27 July 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

29142/2018

Judge

BAM

The court found that neither the two court orders relied upon by the respondents nor the purported appointment of Ms Brenda Weakley as director of Weshoek Beleggings (Pty) Ltd conferred authority to institute action against the applicant. The orders did not empower Adv Van den Berg to act as director or to institute proceedings on behalf of Weshoek Beleggings (Pty) Ltd. The process for appointing Ms Brenda as director was fatally flawed and unlawful, as the sole director was non compos mentis and the necessary formalities for appointment were not followed. The respondents' responses to the Ru…

Source excerpt

• Authority Of Attorney
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Company Director Appointment
• Irregular Step
• Close Corporation
• Derivative Actions

Joubert v South African Legal Practice Council (5220/2022)

Joubert v South African Legal Practice Council (5220/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 70 (16 March 2023)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

5220/2022

Judge

Boonzaaier AJ

High Court interlocutory ruling on late Rule 7 authority challenge, condonation, and irregular-step complaints in an LPC disciplinary matter.

• Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Proceedings
• Condonation
• Authority To Act
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Irregular Steps
• Costs Punitive Scale

SA Diatomite (Pty) Ltd v Maritz N.O and Others (2049/2022)

SA Diatomite (Pty) Ltd v Maritz N.O and Others (2049/2022) [2023] ZANCHC 13 (10 February 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

2049/2022

Judge

Williams

The High Court dismissed an urgent interdict application after finding that SA Diatomite (Pty) Ltd had not properly authorised the proceedings.

• Authority Of Deponent
• Rule 7 Challenge
• Company Resolutions
• Urgent Interdict
• Authority-of-deponent
• Rule-7-challenge

PFC Properties Proprietary Limited and Another v Commissioner, South African Revenue Services (81483/2019)

PFC Properties Proprietary Limited and Another v Commissioner, South African Revenue Services (81483/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 419 (17 June 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

81483/2019

Judge

Joubert

The court dismissed a Rule 7 challenge to the respondent’s attorneys’ authority, holding that the special power of attorney and Commissioner’s authority were sufficient.

• Rule 7 Challenge
• Power Of Attorney
• Tax Administration Act
• Authority Of Attorney
• Costs Order
• Rule-7