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
Webber v Minister of Police (12612/2019) [2024] ZAWCHC 277 (25 September 2024)
The High Court refused condonation for late statutory notice under the Organs of State Act, finding the delay inadequately explained and the delict claim weak.
Sefora v MEC for the Department of Health: Gauteng (14479/21) [2024] ZAGPPHC 840 (27 August 2024)
The High Court granted condonation for late statutory notice under the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act and dismissed the respondent’s points in limine.
Malgas and Another v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services (73418/2016) [2024] ZAGPPHC 183 (23 February 2024)
The High Court upheld a special plea that the plaintiffs failed to give timely statutory notice under section 3 of Act 40 of 2002 and dismissed the claims with costs.
Member of the Executive Council for Health, Eastern Cape v Diko - Appeal (CA1/2023) [2023] ZAECBHC 28 (15 September 2023)
The court held that the appellant (MEC) failed to discharge the burden of proof to establish that the respondent had actual or deemed knowledge of the facts giving rise to the debt more than three years before summons was served. The evidence led by the MEC, primarily through Dr Osman, did not demonstrate that the respondent had sufficient knowledge to suspect fault or negligence by the medical staff. The respondent's awareness of complications and being told there was a problem with the fixation did not equate to knowledge of negligence or the identity of the debtor. The respondent's failure…
Source excerpt
Klue v Minister Of Justice And Correctional Services (1807/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 119 (18 April 2023)
The court held that the plaintiff's cause of action arose when he was sentenced by the trial magistrate on 3 December 2013 and, at the latest, when his application for leave to appeal was dismissed on 27 January 2014. The plaintiff had knowledge of the facts giving rise to his claim at those times, as evidenced by his persistent allegations of judicial error throughout subsequent proceedings. The Supreme Court of Appeal's judgment in April 2020 did not create a new cause of action but merely confirmed what the plaintiff already knew. The claim against the High Court judges arose on 9 March 20…
Source excerpt
Botha and Others v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd; Van Zyl and Others v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd (3878/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 45; 2024 (2) SA 322 (FB) (15 February 2023)
The court held that Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd is not an organ of state to which the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act 40 of 2002 applies. The Act's definition of organ of state is narrower than the constitutional definition and does not include entities exercising public functions in terms of legislation other than the Constitution. Eskom performs its functions under specific statutes, not under the Constitution, and is not listed in the Act or its schedule. Therefore, the plaintiffs were not required to give statutory notice to Eskom before instituting proceed…
Source excerpt
Chauke and Others v Minister of Police and Others (15017/2017) [2022] ZAGPJHC 609 (29 August 2022)
The court held that the plaintiffs’ failure to serve statutory notice under the Act within six months, without condonation, barred the claim despite a pre-trial no-prejudice entry.
Horn v MEC Department of Health, Free State Province (5407/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 184 (20 August 2021)
The High Court held that a complaint letter and related correspondence constituted compliance with section 3 of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act.
Joubert and Another v City of Tshwane, Metropolitan Municipality and Others (94370/16) [2021] ZAGPPHC 3 (14 January 2021)
The court found that the applicants failed to comply with the statutory notice requirements in relation to Claim A, as the initial notice did not refer to the events of 2 January 2015. The explanation for the delay was contradictory and lacked bona fides, with the applicants blaming their attorneys but also asserting that the initial notice was sufficient. No complaints were lodged against the attorneys, and the applicants failed to demonstrate a genuine intent to prosecute the claim. The respondents were unreasonably prejudiced by the delay, as they could not investigate the events years lat…
Source excerpt
Fielding v MEC for Health, Provincial Government of Northern Cape and Another (1930/2018) [2020] ZANCHC 76 (30 October 2020)
The court found that the applicant's explanation for her failure to give statutory notice was plausible, given her lack of sophistication and pain following the surgical procedures. Her new attorneys acted reasonably in seeking medical records before filing the condonation application. The delay was not flagrant, and upon receipt of the expert report, the application was promptly brought. The court held that the claim had not prescribed, good cause existed for the failure, and the defendant was not unreasonably prejudiced, as the absence of the surgeon was not sufficient to refuse condonation…
Source excerpt
Explore more
