South Africa Case Law

BKB Limited v De Bod and Others (14384/2024)

BKB Limited v De Bod and Others (14384/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 195 (9 May 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14384/2024

Judge

RK Parker

The defendants failed to establish a bona fide defence to the plaintiff’s claim for summary judgment. The principal debt and validity of the suretyship agreement are not disputed. The alleged unlawful interference and defamation by the plaintiff are not substantiated by facts, quantifiable loss, or legal authority that would release the sureties from liability. The affidavits provided do not identify specific agents or quantify any prejudice suffered. The alleged counterclaims are unquantified and have not been pursued by SAFAM, precluding reliance on Rule 22(4). The defences raised are perso…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Suretyship Liability
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Defamation
• Counterclaim
• Liquidation Application

Top Quartile PMSA (Pty) Ltd v Sibanye Gold Limited (2017/43073)

Top Quartile PMSA (Pty) Ltd v Sibanye Gold Limited (2017/43073) [2024] ZAGPJHC 753 (25 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2017/43073

Judge

I Opperman

The High Court granted absolution from the instance on Claims A, B and E, but refused it on Claim C in a commercial dispute over a solar project.

• Absolution From The Instance
• Contractual Interpretation
• Negligent Misrepresentation
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Rectification Of Contract
• Non Disclosure Agreement

South African Municipal Workers Union National Medical Scheme (SAMWUMED) v City of Ekurhuleni and Others (1297/2022)

South African Municipal Workers Union National Medical Scheme (SAMWUMED) v City of Ekurhuleni and Others (1297/2022) [2023] ZASCA 182; [2024] 1 All SA 647 (SCA); (2024) 45 ILJ 479 (SCA) (22 December 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1297/2022

Judges

Nicholls, Matojane, Chetty, Masipa, Unterhalter

The SCA held that SAMWUMED could not enforce the collective agreement directly, but could restrain interference with its accredited rights and enforce its broker agreement.

• Collective Agreement
• Medical Scheme Accreditation
• Broker Agreement
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Territorial Limitation
• Public Policy Enforceability

Tread Research CC v Bridoon Trade and Invest 197 (Pty) Ltd t/a Nashua Cape Town (10195/2017)

Tread Research CC v Bridoon Trade and Invest 197 (Pty) Ltd t/a Nashua Cape Town (10195/2017) [2021] ZAWCHC 268; [2022] 1 All SA 865 (WCC) (8 December 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

10195/2017

Judge

Davis

The court found a 2016 telecoms agreement was void for lack of authority, held the defendant unlawfully disrupted services, and awarded damages and restitution.

• Authority Of Company Representatives
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Pure Economic Loss
• Ostensible Authority
• Unjustified Enrichment
• Authority-of-company-representatives

Heightsafety Training Academy (Pty) Ltd v Mose and Others (J2039/19)

Heightsafety Training Academy (Pty) Ltd v Mose and Others (J2039/19) [2019] ZALCJHB 326 (22 November 2019)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2039/19

Judge

Lagrange

The court found that while the applicant has a protectable interest in its exclusive know-how and customer connections, the restraint sought was too broad and would unreasonably prevent the first respondent from pursuing his vocation. The applicant failed to prove a proprietary interest in its training methods or products that would justify a blanket restraint. The Labour Court does not have jurisdiction over delictual claims for unlawful interference with contract, as such claims are not matters concerning a contract of employment under section 77(3) of the BCEA. The applicant's interests ar…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Of Trade
• Protectable Interest
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Enforcement Of Employment Contract

Twende Africa Group (Pty) Ltd t/a TAG Marine v MFV Qavak (476/2018)

Twende Africa Group (Pty) Ltd t/a TAG Marine v MFV Qavak (476/2018) [2019] ZASCA 9 (12 March 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

476/2018

Judges

Navsa, Wallis, Dambuza, Makgoka, Davis

The court found that TAG did not establish a prima facie case for entitlement to commission from Fisherman Fresh. The evidence showed TAG acted as broker for the seller, Donohue Fishing, and not for Fisherman Fresh. There was no express or implied contract between TAG and Fisherman Fresh for the payment of commission, nor was there a limited exclusivity agreement. TAG's listing of the vessel was without authority from the owner, and its communications did not create a contractual relationship. The claim for damages based on breach of exclusivity or unlawful interference failed due to lack of…

Source excerpt

• Brokerage Commission
• Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act
• Contractual Relationship
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Prima Facie Case

Masstores (Pty) Ltd v Pick n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd (20711/14)

Masstores (Pty) Ltd v Pick n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd (20711/14) [2015] ZASCA 164; 2016 (2) SA 586 (SCA); [2016] 2 All SA 351 (SCA) (25 November 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20711/14

Judges

Maya, Leach, Theron, Majiedt, Zondi

The SCA held that Masstores breached its lease restraint by trading as a general food supermarket, unlawfully interfering with Pick n Pay’s exclusivity rights.

• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Restraint Of Trade
• Lease Exclusivity
• Anchor Tenant Rights
• Pure Economic Loss
• Huur Gaat Voor Koop

Pick-N-Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Liberty Group Limited and Others (31739/14)

Pick-N-Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Liberty Group Limited and Others (31739/14) [2014] ZAGPPHC 321; 2015 (4) SA 241 (GP) (5 June 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31739/14

Judge

D S Fourie

Urgent interim-interdict case over alleged lease exclusivity and proposed Game FoodCo expansion at Liberty Midlands Mall.

• Lease Exclusivity
• Interim Interdict
• Unlawful Interference With Contract
• Joinder Of Parties
• Irreparable Harm
• Balance Of Convenience