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
Segal v Tuckett and Others (2020/3822) [2022] ZAGPJHC 184 (1 April 2022)
High Court claim over unpaid share-sale instalments, with a counterclaim and section 45 Companies Act suretyship defences. Most respondents were held liable.
Steenkamp NO and Others v Mashava and Others (36141/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 227 (12 August 2020)
The High Court upheld an exception to a claim attacking an oral share sale as vague, but dismissed the challenge to the annexed valuation document.
Isitiya Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Obaro Handel (Pty) Ltd and Others (19/26787) [2019] ZAGPJHC 429 (15 October 2019)
The High Court set aside an urgent ex parte interim interdict, finding no prima facie right, non-disclosure of material facts, and an abuse of process.
Oosthuizen v Metsep SA (Pty) Ltd (14824/2015) [2016] ZAGPJHC 115 (6 May 2016)
The High Court held that the applicant had not shown a binding agreement for immediate part-payment of a minimum share-sale price, so the matter was sent to trial.
Van der Merwe and Others v Nel (63770/2011) [2015] ZAGPPHC 336 (30 April 2015)
High Court dismissed a shareholders’ delict claim after finding it had prescribed, holding the plaintiffs knew or should have known the facts by July 2008.
Gani v Hassim, East Coast Access (Pty) Ltd v Gani (9006/2010,4554/2011) [2015] ZAKZDHC 3 (16 February 2015)
The court held that the word 'profits' in the share sale agreement must be interpreted as profit before tax, based on the language, context, and commercial purpose of the agreement. The profit target was therefore met, and Mr Hassim became obliged to pay the remaining R2 million to Mr Gani. The court rejected the defence that the purchase price should be reduced due to alleged breach by Mr Gani, finding no evidence of breach of any restraint of trade, non-solicitation, or goodwill protection obligations. The claim for rectification was dismissed as the written agreement reflected the common i…
Source excerpt
De Beer NO en Anders v Mainserve Africa (Edms) Bpk en Anders (236/2013) [2013] ZAFSHC 90 (6 June 2013)
The court found that there are material disputes of fact regarding the authority of De Beer to act on behalf of the trust, the bona fides of the trustees, and the timing of knowledge relevant to prescription. The prescription defence, while compelling, cannot be finally determined without oral evidence and cross-examination, particularly of Kritzinger and Wagenaar. The lis pendens defence was rejected as the parties and relief sought differ between the pending action and the present application. The restitution defence does not automatically defeat the claim, as complex considerations may app…
Source excerpt
Iveco South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Botha (5972/2008) [2011] ZAFSHC 81 (2 June 2011)
Application for leave to appeal in a prescription dispute over a municipal debt tied to a share sale agreement and alleged acknowledgement of liability.
Iozzo NO and Others v Rocha De Figueirdo NO and Others (2010/728) [2011] ZAGPJHC 45 (15 May 2011)
The court found that the M Share Trust was properly constituted and had locus standi, as the beneficiaries and trustees were correctly appointed and authorized. The purchase price for the shares and loan account was contractually agreed and not subject to adjustment based on actual value or alleged misrepresentations. The respondents failed to establish any actionable misrepresentation or non-disclosure that would entitle them to a reduction of the purchase price. The court recognized an implied term by law that the sellers would not deprive the purchasers of the fruits of their bargain, spec…
Source excerpt
Explore more
