Lotter and Another v Lona Fruit Cape (Pty) Ltd and Another (19818/23) [2025] ZAWCHC 196 (12 May 2025)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
19818/23
Judge
Holderness
The High Court dismissed a claim to enforce an alleged 2023 share buyback and alternative specific performance claim, finding no binding agreement and prescription.
Africa Wide Investment Holdings (Pty) Limited v Miganu Investment Holdings (Pty) Limited (8279/2019) [2024] ZAGPJHC 518 (30 May 2024)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
8279/2019
Judge
Maier-Frawley
The High Court ordered discovery under Rule 35 and rejected a bid to defer it, finding no exceptional circumstances. The respondent’s striking out application also failed.
First Rand Bank Limited v Erasmus (27120/2017) [2024] ZAGPJHC 393 (22 April 2024)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
27120/2017
Judge
R Strydom
The court found that the facility agreement between FirstRand and Ms Erasmus was valid and enforceable. The respondent was provided with all relevant terms and conditions, signed the facility letters, and made extensive use of the facility, including re-advances. There was no evidence of misrepresentation, coercion, or unilateral amendment by FirstRand. The respondent's misunderstanding of the account's operation did not constitute a defence, especially given her professional experience. The facility agreement was not void under the National Credit Act or common law, and any unlawful provisio…
Rakhojane v Member of the Executive Council: Department of Health, Northern Cape Province (CA & R 22/2022) [2024] ZANCHC 38 (19 April 2024)
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Case number
CA & R 22/2022
Judges
Phatshoane, Lever, Nxumalo
The court held that the amendment to the particulars of claim did not introduce a new cause of action but merely clarified the existing claim for damages arising from alleged medical negligence. The respondent was timeously informed of all material features of the case prior to the expiration of the prescription period. The delay in filing the amendment and the condonation application did not, in the absence of prejudice, justify refusal of the amendment, especially as the amendment facilitated proper ventilation of the dispute. The striking out of paragraphs from the appellant's answering af…
Mnisi v Nhlapho (2021/53980) [2024] ZAGPJHC 376 (16 April 2024)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2021/53980
Judge
I. Green
The court held that condonation could be sought within the replying affidavit, granted condonation for the late filing, and allowed limited further affidavits on identified new matter.
Dunn N.O. v Thompson and Others (12025/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 281 (14 November 2023)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
12025/2022
Judge
J Cloete
The court interpreted a family trust deed and held that the deceased estates had no vested right to capital distributions. The respondents' striking out application succeeded.
Dirk Lotter Vervoer (Pty) Ltd v Sutherland Transport (Pty) Ltd - Application for Leave to Appeal (922/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 400 (17 October 2023)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
922/2022
Judge
Naidoo
The Free State High Court dismissed Dirk Lotter Vervoer’s application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospect of success under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
Salamousas v South Side Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Orexi Greek Street Food (2023-075201) [2023] ZAGPJHC 914 (15 August 2023)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2023-075201
Judge
EF Dippenaar
The court found that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie right to interdictory relief preventing interference with management and operation of the business, as material disputes of fact regarding the existence and terms of a joint venture agreement could not be resolved on the papers. The harm sought to be prevented had already transpired, rendering the relief moot. However, the applicant did establish a prima facie right to protection of the assets he contributed to the respondent's business, as the respondent did not dispute possession or use of those assets and had no entitleme…