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
Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank v Cronje and Others (3955/2019) [2023] ZAFSHC 127 (20 April 2023)
The High Court dismissed defendants’ bid to dismiss FNB’s claims, finding the bank had complied with prior orders by answering requests for particulars and discovery.
S v Porritt and Another (SS40/2006) [2023] ZAGPJHC 48 (25 January 2023)
The court ordered Porritt to continue cross-examining the witness first, rejected indefinite delay, and required Bennett to provide medical evidence if asserting incapacity.
Abreu and Another v Petsana Family Meat & Chicken CC (2327/2005) [2016] ZAGPPHC 276 (22 April 2016)
The court held that the primary purpose of allowing amendments is to ensure that the real issues between the parties are determined and justice is done. The court found no evidence of bad faith or an attempt to withdraw admissions by the plaintiffs. The defendants are not prejudiced, as they are afforded an opportunity to raise a special plea of prescription. The amendment does not defeat the purpose of the trial, and both parties will have equal opportunities to present their cases. Accordingly, the amendment is granted, and the matter is allowed to proceed to its natural conclusion.
Source excerpt
Westensee v Linde & Westensee CC and Others (3499/2015) [2015] ZAECGHC 87 (11 September 2015)
High Court decision granting separation of a prescription special plea under Rule 33(4) before trial, finding the issue could be determined separately.
Maliga v S (543/2013) [2014] ZASCA 161; 2015 (2) SACR 202 (SCA) (1 October 2014)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court committed a serious irregularity by admitting a confession and statements made to police officers, all of which were inadmissible under the Criminal Procedure Act and the Constitution. The appellant was denied his right to legal representation and was lured into testifying due to the improper admission of these statements. The State failed to establish a prima facie case absent the inadmissible evidence, and the application for discharge under section 174 should have been granted. The conviction and sentence were accordingly set aside, as…
Source excerpt
S v Dlamini (234/04) [2005] ZAGPHC 122 (28 November 2005)
The acting judge recused himself from a criminal trial after concluding that his independence and authority had been compromised by judicial intervention.
Explore more
