South Africa Case Law

Unlawful Occupiers Of Portion 2 of ERF 813 Rosettenville Situated at 18 Haig Street, Rosettenville and Others v Okoye and Others (2022/43051)

Unlawful Occupiers Of Portion 2 of ERF 813 Rosettenville Situated at 18 Haig Street, Rosettenville and Others v Okoye and Others (2022/43051) [2024] ZAGPJHC 843 (30 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/43051

Judge

N Manoim

Leave to appeal against an eviction order was dismissed because the order already protected qualifying occupiers and allowed time for accommodation processes.

• Eviction Proceedings
• Alternative Accommodation
• Right To Housing
• Mandamus
• Superior Courts Act
• Socio Economic Rights

National Credit Regulator v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (44415/16)

National Credit Regulator v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (44415/16) [2019] ZAGPJHC 182; [2019] 3 All SA 846 (GJ); 2019 (5) SA 512 (GJ) (27 June 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

44415/16

Judge

Keightley

The court held that sections 90(2)(n) and 124 of the National Credit Act establish a statutory scheme for set-off that is intended to protect consumers by requiring their informed and written authorisation, specifying the accounts and obligations subject to set-off, and mandating notice before set-off is effected. The common-law right of set-off, which allows credit providers to debit consumer accounts without notice or consent, is fundamentally at odds with the statutory scheme and undermines the Act's objectives of transparency, fairness, and consumer protection. The court found that interp…

Source excerpt

• National Credit Act
• Set Off
• Consumer Protection
• Debt Review
• Statutory Interpretation
• Socio Economic Rights

Meadow Glen Home Owners Association and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (767/2013)

Meadow Glen Home Owners Association and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (767/2013) [2014] ZASCA 209; [2015] 1 All SA 299 (SCA); 2015 (2) SA 413 (SCA) (1 December 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

767/2013

Judges

Cachalia, Wallis, Zondi, Schoeman, Dambuza

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the Municipality was culpably non-compliant with the terms of previous court orders regarding the management of the Woodlane Village settlement, Mr Fenyani was not the correct official to hold personally accountable for contempt. The orders were made by consent and lacked sufficient judicial scrutiny regarding the factual basis for contempt. The court found that contempt proceedings are appropriate only against officials who are personally responsible for wilful non-compliance, and in this case, responsibility lay with the municipal manager, not Mr…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Structural Interdict
• Municipal Obligations
• Socio Economic Rights
• Separation Of Powers
• Eviction Proceedings

Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others (06/13865)

Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others (06/13865) [2008] ZAGPHC 491; [2008] 4 All SA 471 (W) (30 April 2008)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

06/13865

Judge

M P Tsoka

The court considered whether Johannesburg’s free-water policy and prepayment meters in Phiri complied with the Constitution, PAJA, and water-services law.

• Right Of Access To Water
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Equality And Non Discrimination
• Municipal Services
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Socio Economic Rights