South Africa Case Law

Klipdam Diamond Mining Company (PTY) Ltd and Another v Nathan Alec Datnow t/a Shawshank Mining (2673/2017)

Klipdam Diamond Mining Company (PTY) Ltd and Another v Nathan Alec Datnow t/a Shawshank Mining (2673/2017) [2022] ZANCHC 85 (20 January 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

2673/2017

Judge

Stanton

The court found that the oral agreement did not amount to a transfer or lease of mining rights, as the plaintiff merely obtained the right to mine on a portion of the property and did not become the owner of the diamonds mined. The evidence and pleadings, though not perfectly aligned, were fully canvassed and did not prejudice the defendants. The defendants failed to prove statutory illegality or that the agreement was invalid under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act or the General Law Amendment Act. The objective facts supported the conclusion that the mining right remained…

Source excerpt

• Mining Rights
• Oral Contracts
• Statutory Illegality
• Royalty Payments
• Leave To Appeal
• Contractual Pleadings

Nedbank Limited v Steyn NO and Others (28991/2018)

Nedbank Limited v Steyn NO and Others (28991/2018) [2020] ZAGPJHC 77 (21 February 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

28991/2018

Judge

G.Y. Benson

The court found that the trustees and Trusts have contravened the Housing Development Schemes for Retired Persons Act by failing to obtain the required endorsements for the sale and onward disposal of life rights in retirement villages. The agreements between the Trusts and life right holders prohibit the transfer or cession of rights by the holders, and the Trusts remain the sole marketers and owners of the developments. The relief granted serves to protect future purchasers and the rights of Nedbank as mortgagee. The court held that the threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 1…

Source excerpt

• Housing Development Schemes For Retired Persons Act
• Leave To Appeal Threshold
• Section 18 Application
• Non Joinder
• Statutory Illegality

Cool Ideas 1186 CC v Hubbard and Another (CCT 99/13)

Cool Ideas 1186 CC v Hubbard and Another (CCT 99/13) [2014] ZACC 16; 2014 (4) SA 474 (CC); 2014 (8) BCLR 869 (CC) (5 June 2014)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 99/13

Judges

Moseneke, Skweyiya, Cameron, Dambuza, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Majiedt, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo

The Constitutional Court held that an unregistered home builder could not enforce payment or have the arbitration award made a court order.

• Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act
• Arbitration Award Enforcement
• Unregistered Home Builder
• Access To Courts
• Right To Property
• Statutory Illegality

Morkel v Thornhill (A105/2009)

Morkel v Thornhill (A105/2009) [2010] ZAFSHC 29 (4 March 2010)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A105/2009

Judges

Hancke, Ebrahim, Moolla

High Court appeal over a farm lease held that renewal options could be renounced, preserving the valid initial term, and that cancellation was not clearly communicated.

• Lease Agreements
• Severability Of Contract
• Subdivision Of Agricultural Land Act
• Contract Cancellation
• Statutory Illegality
• Lease-agreements

Bentel Abramson & Partners (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sender NO (A5039/06)

Bentel Abramson & Partners (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sender NO (A5039/06) [2007] ZAGPHC 361 (17 October 2007)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

A5039/06

Judges

D S S Moshidi, M P Tsoka, P A Meyer

Appeal allowed: the High Court held that non-registration under the Architects’ Act did not automatically bar recovery of architectural fees.

• Architects Registration
• Statutory Illegality
• Absolution From Instance
• Professional Services Contract
• Interpretation Of Statutes
• Architects-registration

Madzivhandila and Others v Madzivhandila and Another (584/2002)

Madzivhandila and Others v Madzivhandila and Another (584/2002) [2004] ZASCA 12 (24 March 2004)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

584/2002

Judges

Mthiyane, Jones, Van Heerden

The court held that property held in a nominee’s name could still form part of a marital joint estate, and rejected an illegality argument based on public-service rules.

• Joint Estate Declaration
• Nominee Ownership
• Statutory Illegality
• Division Of Estate
• Joint-estate
• Nominee-ownership