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
Mokoena v Minister of Police and Another (816/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 344 (7 November 2024)
The High Court granted condonation for late notice under the Organs of State Act, finding good cause, no unreasonable prejudice, and awarding no costs.
Motaung v Minister of Department of Police and Another (1308/2021) [2024] ZAFSHC 288 (12 September 2024)
The court found that the applicant's claim had not prescribed and that the delay in serving the statutory notice was not due to a flagrant disregard of the statutory requirements, but rather arose from the applicant's reliance on legal advice and the process of changing attorneys. The applicant provided an acceptable explanation for the delay, and the respondents failed to demonstrate any unreasonable prejudice resulting from the late delivery of the notice. The requirements for condonation under section 3(4)(b) of Act 40 of 2002 were satisfied, and the court exercised its discretion in favou…
Source excerpt
Church v MEC: Free State Provincial Government: Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (527/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 148 (28 May 2024)
The court found that the applicant's claim had not prescribed and that the delay in serving notice was due to a bona fide but mistaken belief regarding the Act's applicability. The applicant's explanation was accepted as sufficient and not mala fide. The respondents were not unreasonably prejudiced, as they had been in constant communication with the applicant and were aware of the issues. Changes in personnel and document availability were considered inevitable and did not amount to unreasonable prejudice. The merits of the applicant's claim were not devoid of substance, and the matter shoul…
Source excerpt
Mathobela v Minister of Police and Another (417/2022) [2023] ZAMPMHC 38 (20 October 2023)
The High Court granted condonation for late notice under section 3 of Act 40 of 2002, finding a sufficient explanation for the initial delay and no unreasonable prejudice.
Simanga v South African National Roads Agency SOC Ltd (1532/2022) [2023] ZAECMKHC 97 (12 September 2023)
The court found that the applicant's claim had not prescribed, as summons was issued and served before the end of the prescriptive period. The delay in serving notice was fully explained and attributable to the applicant's legal representatives, not the applicant himself, who acted bona fide and reasonably as a lay person. Although the prospects of success were not strong due to limited detail, the applicant was not responsible for the delay. SANRAL failed to demonstrate unreasonable prejudice resulting from the late notice. The requirements for condonation under s 3(4) of the Act were met, a…
Source excerpt
Janeke v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (63060/2018) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1120 (5 September 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to show good cause for condonation of non-compliance with the statutory requirements under the Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act. The explanation for the delay was inadequate and did not cover the entire period. The applicant was legally represented and had ample time to identify the responsible authority and serve notice, yet failed to do so. Notice was not served on the correct official as required by section 4(1)(a), and summons was served before the expiry of the required 30-day period after notice. The responden…
Source excerpt
M.A.M obo M.K v MEC for the Department of Education Gauteng Province and Others (14625/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 683 (13 September 2022)
The court found that the applicant's delay in serving notice was explained by her lack of knowledge of the statutory requirements and the circumstances of caring for a child with severe disabilities. The debt had not prescribed due to the minor child's mental condition, which constituted an impediment under the Prescription Act. The applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay, and the respondents failed to demonstrate actual prejudice resulting from the late notice. The requirements for condonation under section 3(4) of the Act are conjunctive, and the applicant satisfied all th…
Source excerpt
Roodt and Others v Member of Executive Council for Health (823/2019) [2022] ZAFSHC 25 (10 February 2022)
The court found that the applicants failed to show good cause for the late notice as required by section 4 of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. Their explanation for the delay was insufficient, with the claim of ignorance of the law contradicted by their conduct and lack of detailed disclosure regarding financial constraints. The delay attributed to the Covid-19 pandemic did not account for the entire period, and the applicants did not provide a comprehensive explanation. The respondent's claim of prejudice was limited to legal costs, which the court fo…
Source excerpt
NM obo IM v MEC for Health: Eastern Cape Province (2983/2020) [2021] ZAECMHC 26; 2021 (6) SA 490 (ECM) (3 August 2021)
The court found that the applicant, due to her limited education and lack of access to medical records, could not reasonably have known that her child's cerebral palsy was caused by medical negligence until she consulted with Nonxuba Attorneys on 29 January 2020. The respondent's arguments that the applicant should have known earlier were rejected as speculative and inconsistent with the facts. The court held that the debt had not prescribed, good cause existed for the delay, and the respondent failed to demonstrate unreasonable prejudice resulting from the late notice. The applicant's explan…
Source excerpt
Minister of Safety and Security v Rall (CA160/2020) [2021] ZAECGHC 66 (20 July 2021)
The High Court upheld an appeal and refused condonation for late notice under the State Liability notice Act, finding no good cause and unreasonable prejudice.
Explore more
