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
Van Basten v Odendaal (4648/2019) [2023] ZAFSHC 160; [2023] 3 All SA 289 (FB) (28 April 2023)
The High Court held that the plaintiff did not give a valid contractual demand before cancelling a farm lease, because the notice procedure in the lease was not strictly followed.
Molefe v Nedcor Bank Limited and Others (99/754) [2023] ZAGPJHC 20 (12 January 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable and plausible explanation for his default and the extensive delay in bringing the rescission application, which was filed twenty-two years after the default judgment. The applicant's version was contradicted by documentary evidence and affidavits, and he failed to establish a bona fide or prima facie defence. The court held that service of summons was properly effected at the applicant's chosen domicilium, and Nedcor Bank was entitled to judgment and sale in execution. The applicant's reliance on Rule 42(1)(a) and the common la…
Source excerpt
Tshinondiwa v SA Taxi Development Finance (Pty) Ltd (21586/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 297 (6 May 2022)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a default judgment and return a vehicle, finding service was valid at the chosen domicilium and no bona fide defence was shown.
Linde v First Rand Bank Limited (3394/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 316 (2 December 2021)
The court found that the applicant was properly served at his chosen domicilium address and was fully aware of the proceedings and judgment, as evidenced by his responses to emails and the sheriff's return of service. The applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in filing the rescission application and was in wilful default. The applicant did not establish a bona fide defence, as the arrears were never settled and the respondent complied with Section 129 of the National Credit Act by ensuring the applicant actually received the notice. The Section 129 notice was vali…
Source excerpt
Kruger v ABSA BANK Limited (16/25398) [2018] ZAGPPHC 81 (15 March 2018)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a default judgment, finding no reasonable explanation for the delay and no bona fide defence with prospects of success.
Mathys Wynand De Bruyn t/a De Bruyn and Associates v Classis Number Trading 80 (Pty) Ltd t/a Nashua Tshwane (13470/17) [2017] ZAGPPHC 982 (7 December 2017)
The court rescinded a default judgment but held the respondent acted reasonably in serving summons at the chosen domicilium, limiting costs against the applicant.
Pretorius and Others v Iliad Africa Trading (Pty) Ltd (5348/2016) [2017] ZAFSHC 85 (25 May 2017)
The court found that the applicants provided a satisfactory explanation for their default, as they were unaware of the second action due to relocation and could not reasonably anticipate duplicate proceedings. However, the applicants failed to establish a bona fide defence to the respondent's claim. The plea of lis alibi pendens, while available, is dilatory and does not invalidate the default judgment in the absence of a substantive defence. The defences raised regarding procedural defects, absence of written suretyship, and applicability of the National Credit Act were either rectified in t…
Source excerpt
Cole v Kallie; In re: Kallie v Cole and Others (03863/2014) [2016] ZAGPJHC 206 (29 July 2016)
The court found that service of the main application was properly effected at Cole's chosen domicilium citandi et executandi as stipulated in the shareholders agreement, in accordance with Rule 4(1)(a)(iv) of the Uniform Rules. There was no basis for service by edictal citation, and Cole was aware of the proceedings but failed to oppose. The court held that it had jurisdiction over Cole and the subject matter, as the relevant facts and contractual connections were within its territorial jurisdiction. No error or irregularity was established in the granting of the original order, and the requi…
Source excerpt
Mushwana and Another v Bondev Midrand (Pty) Ltd and Others (1415/14) [2016] ZAGPPHC 43 (3 February 2016)
The High Court rescinded a default judgment after finding proper service at domicilium, but a reasonable default explanation and a prima facie defence were shown.
Wishart NO and Another v Firstrand Bank Limited (3459/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 58 (28 November 2014)
The court found that service of summons at the chosen domicilium address was not sufficient in this case, as the property had been sold and vacated years before, and the trust had no connection to the address at the time of service. There was no evidence that the applicants or the trust received the summons, and the probabilities indicated they did not. The applicants' explanation for default was reasonable and bona fide, and there was no deliberate avoidance. The suretyship was not validly executed as the first applicant lacked authority and did not act jointly with the other trustees, nor w…
Source excerpt
Explore more
