Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Admiralty And Maritime [2012] ZAKZDHC 75

Grand Spartounta Incorporated and Others v TMT Bulk Corporation (A66/11)

Grand Spartounta Incorporated and Others v TMT Bulk Corporation (A66/11) [2012] ZAKZDHC 75 (13 November 2012)

Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
A66/11
Judge
J.C. King

The court found that the Respondent failed to disclose material information in its ex parte arrest application, particularly regarding the true state of claims and counterclaims between the parties. The Respondent's own documents showed that it owed substantial amounts to the Applicants, which was not properly disclosed in the founding affidavit. The court held that it is not sufficient for material facts to be buried in annexures; they must be clearly drawn to the court's attention. The Respondent did not establish a genuine and reasonable need for security, as the risk of non-payment was no…

Source excerpt

  • Arrest Of Ship
  • Security For Claims
  • Material Non Disclosure
  • Urgent Application
  • Prima Facie Case
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2004] ZAGPHC 17

Jacobs v Williams and Others (16789/2004)

Jacobs v Williams and Others (16789/2004) [2004] ZAGPHC 17 (7 October 2004)

Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Case number
16789/2004
Judge
N.P. Willis

The court found that the applicant had established, on a prima facie basis, that the first respondent was likely to dissipate funds with the intention of defeating the applicant's claims in the division of the joint estate. The history of the matter, including previous non-compliance with court orders and the liquidator's evidence of uncooperative conduct, supported the applicant's apprehension of irreparable harm. The applicant's willingness to accept security satisfactory to the liquidator demonstrated that the balance of convenience favoured granting the interdict. The court held that no o…

Source excerpt

  • Interim Interdict
  • Division Of Joint Estate
  • Dissipation Of Assets
  • Security For Claims
Read case analysis
Admiralty And Maritime [2002] ZASCA 18

"Merak S" (Name of Ship) Sea Melody Enterprises SA v Bulktrans (Europe) Corporation (178/2000)

"Merak S" (Name of Ship) Sea Melody Enterprises SA v Bulktrans (Europe) Corporation (178/2000) [2002] ZASCA 18; 2002 (4) SA 273 (SCA) (27 March 2002)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
178/2000
Judges
Farlam, Hefer, Nienaber, Mpati, Lewis

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant to secure the release of the vessel 'Merak S' from arrest constitutes 'security' within the meaning of section 5(2)(d) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act. The court found that maritime practice in South Africa and England treats such guarantees as equivalent to bail, and there is no reason to restrict the ordinary meaning of 'security' to exclude them. The court further held that its powers under section 5(2)(c)-(d) are sufficiently broad to allow for the reduction of security and the ordering of cou…

Source excerpt

  • Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act
  • Security For Claims
  • Counter Security
  • Guarantee As Security
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.