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
S v Ntinga and Another (CCD55/2023) [2025] ZAKZPHC 33 (28 March 2025)
Sentencing judgment in a murder, robbery and kidnapping case. The court imposed life imprisonment on accused one and 25 years on accused two, with firearm disqualifications.
Miya NO v Miya and Another (AR467/2022) [2024] ZAKZPHC 88 (11 October 2024)
Appeal in an eviction dispute dismissed: although the estate representative had standing and the respondent was an unlawful occupier, eviction was not just and equitable.
S v Phakathi and Others (judgment on sentence) (CCD52/2021) [2024] ZAKZPHC 20 (18 March 2024)
On sentence, the High Court departed from the prescribed minimum for murder and robbery, finding substantial and compelling circumstances and imposing effective terms of 20 and 25 years.
eThekwini Municipality v Nair and Others (D6235/2021) [2023] ZAKZDHC 51 (1 August 2023)
The court found that the relief sought by the municipality was drastic and lacked empathy for the respondents' living conditions. Eviction would render the respondents homeless, which is neither just nor equitable under the PIE Act and constitutional principles. The municipality would remain responsible for rehousing the respondents if eviction were granted. The court emphasized the need for a pragmatic solution, requiring the respondents to seek planning approval for the unauthorised structure and the municipality to assist in this process, rather than simply evicting the family and creating…
Source excerpt
S v Mncube (JUDGMENT ON SENTENCE) (CCP42/2021) [2023] ZAKZPHC 16 (17 February 2023)
In a murder sentencing judgment, the High Court held that ubuntu could not outweigh the accused’s lack of remorse or justify departing from minimum sentencing.
Ishmail v G L Events Oasys Consortium and Another (19126/18) [2021] ZAGPPHC 384 (18 June 2021)
The court granted an elderly plaintiff leave to record evidence on commission under Rule 38 because of ill-health, while preserving the respondents’ participation rights.
Beadica 231 CC and Others v Trustees for the time being of the Oregon Trust and Others (CCT109/19) [2020] ZACC 13; 2020 (5) SA 247 (CC); 2020 (9) BCLR 1098 (CC) (17 June 2020)
The majority held that the applicants failed to discharge the onus of demonstrating that enforcement of the lease renewal clauses would be contrary to public policy. The renewal clauses were clear, simple, and understandable, and the applicants did not provide a sufficient explanation for their failure to comply. The harsh outcome of eviction and business collapse, absent such explanation, was not enough to render enforcement contrary to public policy. The court reaffirmed that public policy is informed by constitutional values, but that abstract notions of fairness, reasonableness, and good…
Source excerpt
Xiuguo and Another v Director-General of the Department of Home Affairs and Another (60392/16) [2018] ZAGPPHC 508 (5 July 2018)
The court found that the directive issued by the First Respondent on 3 February 2016, which retracted Circular No 10 of 2008, does not have retrospective effect on pending legalization applications. The First Applicant's application, submitted prior to the directive, must be considered in accordance with the principles established in Dabone, which allow asylum seekers to apply for residence permits under the Immigration Act. The refusal to register the birth of the Applicants' child was found to be unlawful, as the child is entitled to South African citizenship by virtue of having a South Afr…
Source excerpt
Mohamed's Leisure Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Southern Sun Hotel Interests (Pty) Ltd (183/17) [2017] ZASCA 176; 2018 (2) SA 314 (SCA) (1 December 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the cancellation clause in the lease agreement was neither objectively unconscionable nor contrary to public policy. Both parties contracted freely and on equal footing, and the respondent was aware of the consequences of breach. The respondent's failure to pay rental on time, even if caused by its bank, constituted a breach that triggered the appellant's right to cancel and seek eviction. The court found no constitutional or public policy grounds to relax the principle of pacta sunt servanda or to infuse the contract with notions of ubuntu or good faith…
Source excerpt
Road Accident Fund v Mohohlo (882/2016) [2017] ZASCA 155; 2018 (2) SA 65 (SCA) (24 November 2017)
The SCA held that a de facto mother-child relationship and indigence can justify a dependant’s claim for loss of support, dismissing the RAF’s appeal.
Explore more
