South Africa Case Law

Sable Place Properties 106 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Visa Security Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (097988/2025)

Sable Place Properties 106 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Visa Security Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (097988/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 760 (18 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

097988/2025

Judge

Minnaar

The court granted a section 18 application, keeping an urgent interdict operative pending appeal and awarding costs, including wasted costs, against the first respondent.

• Section 18 Application
• Interim Interdict
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm
• Security Services Contract
• Section-18

S.B.H v Mncube NO and Another (2025/038564)

S.B.H v Mncube NO and Another (2025/038564) [2025] ZAGPJHC 424 (29 April 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2025/038564

Judge

H A van der Merwe

Court dismissed rescission, granted leave to appeal, and ordered the judgment not be suspended pending appeal in a child relocation dispute.

• Best Interests Of Child
• Leave To Appeal
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Section 18 Application
• Oral Evidence
• False Affidavit Evidence

PTPC (Pty) Limited v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (117036/2024)

PTPC (Pty) Limited v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (117036/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 308 (28 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

117036/2024

Judge

Nyathi

The High Court struck an urgent application from the roll for lack of urgency where PTPC sought execution of a spoliation order pending leave to appeal.

• Spoliation Order
• Section 18 Application
• Urgency
• Execution Pending Appeal
• Section-18-application
• Spoliation-order

Aviation Co-Ordination Services (Pty) Limited and Others v Airports Company South Africa SOC Limited and Others (2023/119918)

Aviation Co-Ordination Services (Pty) Limited and Others v Airports Company South Africa SOC Limited and Others (2023/119918) [2025] ZAGPJHC 178 (28 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/119918

Judge

Adams

The court found that the orders granted on 5 November 2024 are appealable, as the interests of justice require consideration of the public importance and statutory powers implicated. The respondents satisfied the requirements for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act, as there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion and compelling reasons exist due to the public interest in aviation safety and statutory compliance. The court held that the applicants are entitled to declaratory relief under section 18(2), as the order…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Interim Interdict
• Mandamus
• Appealability
• Section 18 Application
• Airport Regulation

Notshe Attorneys v State Attorney, Mthatha and Others (Leave to Appeal) (1071/2022)

Notshe Attorneys v State Attorney, Mthatha and Others (Leave to Appeal) (1071/2022) [2025] ZAECMHC 64 (20 February 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

1071/2022

Judge

Mjame

The High Court granted leave to appeal to the State Attorney and Minister of Justice, dismissed the Minister of Police’s leave application, and refused a section 18(3) execution request.

• Leave To Appeal
• Section 18 Application
• Joinder Of Parties
• Outsourcing Of State Legal Work
• Indemnification
• Irreparable Harm

Sibanye Gold Limited and Others v Valuation Appeal Board for Randwest City Local Municipality and Others (2022/043793)

Sibanye Gold Limited and Others v Valuation Appeal Board for Randwest City Local Municipality and Others (2022/043793) [2025] ZAGPJHC 159 (18 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/043793

Judge

M A Makume

The court found that the mining companies failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by Section 7(2) of PAJA before launching their review application. The separation of issues before the Valuation Appeal Board did not constitute finalization of the internal process, and the applicants were bound by their agreement to resolve all remaining issues before the VAB. The grounds of appeal did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons under Section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, and granting leave to appeal would not lead to a just and prompt resolution of the di…

Source excerpt

• Exhaustion Of Internal Remedies
• Municipal Property Rates Act
• Leave To Appeal
• Section 18 Application
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm

Colgate-Palmolive (Pty) Ltd and Another v Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd and Another (095598/2024)

Colgate-Palmolive (Pty) Ltd and Another v Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd and Another (095598/2024) [2025] ZAGPJHC 38 (27 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

095598/2024

Judge

N Manoim

The High Court granted leave to appeal, leave to cross-appeal, and section 18(3) relief in long-running Colgate v Bliss packaging litigation.

• Advertising Regulation
• Contempt Of Court
• Section 18 Application
• Jurisdiction Of Arb
• Cross Appeal
• Exceptional Circumstances

Unemployment Insurance Fund and Another v Johnson and Others (134443/2023)

Unemployment Insurance Fund and Another v Johnson and Others (134443/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1336 (13 December 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

134443/2023

Judge

N Davis

High Court granted section 18(3) relief keeping an earlier order enforceable pending appeal, to secure public funds advanced under a mezzanine facility.

• Section 18 Application
• Mezzanine Facility Agreement
• Security For Debt
• Irreparable Harm
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Corporate Control

Executive Mobility Financial Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Gulf Oils and Fuels (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/112065)

Executive Mobility Financial Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Gulf Oils and Fuels (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/112065) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1184 (20 November 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/112065

Judge

Mudau

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the vehicle and entitled to its return under the rei vindicatio. The fourth respondent failed to plead or prove any valid sale agreement or entitlement to retain possession. The grounds for leave to appeal were unsubstantiated, and there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The applicant demonstrated exceptional circumstances justifying the order remaining operational and effective pending appeal, including the risk of irreparable harm if the vehicle was not returned, given previous inst…

Source excerpt

• Rei Vindicatio
• Leave To Appeal
• Ownership Of Motor Vehicle
• Section 18 Application
• Urgent Application

Jones and Others v Delport and Others (2023/082594)

Jones and Others v Delport and Others (2023/082594) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1182 (20 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023/082594

Judge

H F Oosthuizen

The court found that the applicants failed to establish truly exceptional circumstances justifying deviation from the default rule that the appeal process suspends the operation and execution of the order. The applicants did not prove on a balance of probabilities that they would suffer irreparable harm if the order is not implemented. Allegations of financial mismanagement and lack of oversight may harm the companies or their shareholders, but there was no evidence of irreparable harm to the applicants themselves. The absence of irreparable harm to the respondents does not suffice, as all re…

Source excerpt

• Section 18 Application
• Director Removal
• Companies Act 2008
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm