South Africa Case Law

Mokoena v Dinkebogile Transport Services (Reasons) (CIV APP RC 09/2020)

Mokoena v Dinkebogile Transport Services (Reasons) (CIV APP RC 09/2020) [2025] ZANWHC 88 (27 May 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CIV APP RC 09/2020

Judges

Hendricks, Masike

The respondent failed to comply with multiple procedural requirements, including late filing of the notice of appeal, failure to provide security for costs, and submission of an incomplete record. No application for condonation was made for the incomplete record, nor was there any application to dispense with security for costs. The respondent did not take proper procedural steps to challenge the alleged irregularity of the application to strike, such as filing a notice under rule 30. The cumulative effect of these failures constituted a flagrant disregard for the rules of court. The appeal w…

Source excerpt

• Striking From Roll
• Security For Costs
• Condonation
• Appeal Record Completeness

Motloi v Morolongo N.O and Others (2023/072243)

Motloi v Morolongo N.O and Others (2023/072243) [2025] ZAGPJHC 432 (22 April 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/072243

Judge

Crutchfield

The South Gauteng High Court does not have jurisdiction over the executor, the Master of the High Court, or the Registrar of Deeds in Bloemfontein, nor over the second to ninth respondents due to improper service. The applicant was made aware of the jurisdictional defect by the first respondent's answering affidavit but failed to withdraw the application, resulting in unnecessary costs. The application is therefore struck from the roll for lack of jurisdiction, and the applicant is ordered to pay the first respondent's costs on a party and party scale (scale C).

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Deceased Estate
• Costs Order
• Striking From Roll

Mathara Investments CC v State Information Technology Agency Soc Limited and Another (10224/2024)

Mathara Investments CC v State Information Technology Agency Soc Limited and Another (10224/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 147 (18 October 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

10224/2024

Judge

N Gaisa

The High Court struck the urgent application from the roll, finding the applicant had not shown sufficient urgency or irreparable harm after a 13-day delay.

• Urgent Application
• Uniform Rule 6 12
• Striking From Roll
• Service Level Agreement Termination
• Urgent-application
• Uniform-rule-6-12

Govender v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (2024/088827)

Govender v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (2024/088827) [2024] ZAGPJHC 779 (20 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/088827

Judge

S Yacoob

The High Court struck an urgent application from the roll after finding the applicant had not justified the extreme urgency or shown prejudice from transfer to another correctional centre.

• Urgency Requirements
• Striking From Roll
• Costs Order
• Urgency-requirements
• Striking-from-roll
• Costs-order

Ramballi v Rietvlei Ridge Homeowners Association (B5368/2023)

Ramballi v Rietvlei Ridge Homeowners Association (B5368/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 324 (8 April 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

B5368/2023

Judge

V Ngalwana

The court gave reasons for costs orders after striking an urgent application from the roll and refused to entertain leave to appeal at that stage.

• Costs Orders
• Striking From Roll
• Self Represented Litigant
• Punitive Costs
• Civil-procedure
• Costs-orders

Native Child Africa (Pty) Ltd v Akinwale and Another (125850/2023)

Native Child Africa (Pty) Ltd v Akinwale and Another (125850/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 71 (30 January 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

125850/2023

Judge

K Strydom

The High Court varied its earlier order to correct the record, confirming that the second respondent’s application was struck off for lack of urgency with costs awarded.

• Variation Of Judgment
• Costs Order
• Striking From Roll
• Urgency
• Variation-of-judgment
• Costs-order

Siyakhulisa Trading Enterprise (Pty) Ltd v Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023-038568)

Siyakhulisa Trading Enterprise (Pty) Ltd v Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023-038568) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1363 (24 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023-038568

Judge

Ford

The court held that the order striking the urgent application from the roll for lack of urgency is not appealable, as it is not final in effect, does not determine the rights of the parties, and does not dispose of any substantive relief. The judgment relied on the Zweni test and confirmed that procedural orders of this nature do not meet the criteria for appealability. The applicant's arguments regarding inherent urgency and spoliation were rejected, as the court found no reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The applicant's application for leave to appeal was accordingly refused, and c…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Urgency In Motion Proceedings
• Spoliation
• Striking From Roll

Ingerop South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Department of Water and Sanitation and Others (082093/2023)

Ingerop South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Department of Water and Sanitation and Others (082093/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1172 (13 September 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

082093/2023

Judge

C Pretorius

The court found that the applicant failed to establish sufficient grounds for urgency. The matter did not warrant immediate judicial intervention, and the requirements for urgency as set out in the Uniform Rules of Court were not met. Consequently, the application was struck from the roll, and the applicant was ordered to pay the costs.

Source excerpt

• Urgency
• Striking From Roll
• Costs Order

Volvo Financial Services Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Adamas Tkolose Trading CC (2023/067290)

Volvo Financial Services Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Adamas Tkolose Trading CC (2023/067290) [2023] ZAGPJHC 846 (1 August 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/067290

Judge

S D J Wilson

The court held that urgency is not inherent to any category of claim, including the rei vindicatio. Urgency must be established by reference to the facts and circumstances demonstrating imminent and irreparable harm if relief is not granted. The applicant failed to provide evidence that the property was at risk of being lost, destroyed, or placed beyond reach, nor did it allege damage beyond ordinary wear and tear. The argument that vindicatory proceedings are inherently urgent was rejected, and reliance on Jacobs v Mostert was expressly disapproved. Consequently, the application was struck f…

Source excerpt

• Urgency
• Rei Vindicatio
• Striking From Roll

Ratlou Local Municipality v Sejake and Others (UM185/2022)

Ratlou Local Municipality v Sejake and Others (UM185/2022) [2022] ZANWHC 42 (11 October 2022)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

UM185/2022

Judge

K Mongale

Urgent application struck from the roll for lack of urgency after the court found the delay unexplained and substantial redress remained available.

• Urgency
• Striking From Roll
• Writ Of Execution
• Non Joinder
• Res Judicata
• Lis Pendens