South Africa Case Law

Maite v Borman Duma Zitha Attorneys (42064/2017)

Maite v Borman Duma Zitha Attorneys (42064/2017) [2025] ZAGPJHC 183 (18 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

42064/2017

Judge

Snyman

The plaintiff was briefed by the defendant for each invoice and performed the required legal work. The invoices for individual claimant RAF matters (A1 to A26) were not subject to any specific condition of taxation or assessment, and the defendant did not dispute or challenge them prior to litigation. The applicable payment terms were governed by the Pretoria Bar Council Rules, requiring payment unless disputed and subject to a 60-day period. The defendant's plea did not raise assessment or taxation as a defence, and no evidence was presented to substantiate claims of unreasonableness or fict…

Source excerpt

• Professional Fees
• Road Accident Fund
• Service Agreement
• Invoice Payment
• Reasonableness Of Fees

PPT Group (Pty) Ltd v Bitco Telecoms (Pty) Ltd (2023/034641)

PPT Group (Pty) Ltd v Bitco Telecoms (Pty) Ltd (2023/034641) [2024] ZAGPJHC 569 (30 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/034641

Judge

Fisher

The High Court held that Mr Silva’s attendance at an unrelated meeting did not breach clause 28.1, so the respondent’s cancellation was repudiatory.

• Contract Interpretation
• Repudiation
• Liquidated Damages
• Service Agreement
• Early Cancellation
• Parol Evidence Rule

Kosmos Ridge Homeowner's Association v Maseko and Others

Kosmos Ridge Homeowner's Association v Maseko and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 221; 30085/09 (27 March 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

30085/09

Judge

Mnyovu

The court found that the applicant failed to establish contempt of the 2019 order against the respondents. The present officials were not personally served with the 2019 order and only became aware of it after assuming office. The respondents demonstrated that their conduct was not wilful or mala fide, and they acted in accordance with governing prescripts. The court accepted the respondents' argument that the 2005, 2011, and 2019 orders were erroneously granted without proper determination of the merits and in contravention of statutory requirements and the doctrine of legality. The duty to…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Municipal Governance
• Doctrine Of Legality
• Service Agreement
• Rule 42 Uniform Rules

Damal Trading (Pty) Ltd and Others v Transaction Capital Payment Solutions (Pty) Ltd (2020/17363)

Damal Trading (Pty) Ltd and Others v Transaction Capital Payment Solutions (Pty) Ltd (2020/17363) [2023] ZAGPJHC 89 (3 February 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/17363

Judge

Dlamini

The High Court ordered payment of R1,849,104.59 under NAEDO service agreements, rejecting the respondent’s reliance on a pending class action.

• Contractual Indemnity
• Service Agreement
• Money Judgment
• Termination Of Contract
• Contractual-indemnity
• Service-agreement

Vosloorus Square CC V Tramore Properties Group (Pty) Ltd (36706/14; 36706/14)

Vosloorus Square CC V Tramore Properties Group (Pty) Ltd (36706/14; 36706/14) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1073 (4 October 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

36706/14

Judges

Neukircher, Tuchten, Teffo

High Court appeal on enforcement of a land exchange and related service agreement, with the court upholding the appellant’s claim and dismissing objections based on locus standi and alleged impediments.

• Specific Performance
• Exchange Of Land
• Locus Standi
• Service Agreement
• Contractual Obligations
• Statutory Impediment

Kingdom Caterers (KZN) (Pty) Ltd v Bid Appeals Tribunal and Others (8155/07)

Kingdom Caterers (KZN) (Pty) Ltd v Bid Appeals Tribunal and Others (8155/07) [2007] ZAKZHC 54 (11 October 2007)

Court

High Courts - Kwazulu Natal

Case number

8155/07

Judge

Msimang

The court held that the service agreement between the applicant and the Department was on a month-to-month basis and required reasonable notice of termination, which must expire at the end of a monthly period. The notice issued by the Department did not provide a full calendar month's notice and was therefore invalid. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the defective notice should be given effect until the end of October 2007, finding that an invalid notice cannot have legal efficacy. The applicant was entitled to remain as caterer at Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Hospital until a val…

Source excerpt

• Termination Of Contract
• Reasonable Notice
• Interim Interdict
• Service Agreement
• Contractual Validity