South Africa Case Law

Mjila and Partners Inc and Another v Carospan (Pty) Ltd t/a Nashua Kimberley (1264/23)

Mjila and Partners Inc and Another v Carospan (Pty) Ltd t/a Nashua Kimberley (1264/23) [2025] ZANCHC 71 (8 August 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1264/23

Judge

Olivier AJ

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a proper and sufficient explanation for their default in filing a plea, both before and after the second notice of bar. The applicants confused the events surrounding the first and second notices of bar and did not clarify the alleged oversight or their belief that they were still engaged in Rule 28 proceedings. The correspondence relied upon did not substantiate their explanation. The applicants did not provide details of their intended defence or annex a draft plea, making it impossible for the court to assess prospects of success. The c…

Source excerpt

• Uplifting Of Bar
• Condonation For Late Plea
• Uniform Rules Of Court
• Good Cause Requirement

Ingqwele Consulting and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd v Cummins South Africa (Pty) Ltd (27880/2022)

Ingqwele Consulting and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd v Cummins South Africa (Pty) Ltd (27880/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 293 (17 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

27880/2022

Judge

Geach

The court held that the respondent's notice of bar was premature, as it was served immediately after the dismissal of the applicant's exception without allowing the applicant the twenty-day period to plead as contemplated by Rule 22(1). The rules do not provide for immediate barring in such circumstances, and the notice of bar should only be served after the time to plead has elapsed post-dismissal. The applicant's failure to respond within five days to an illegitimate notice of bar does not constitute a delay requiring explanation. The applicant's plea and counterclaims, though delivered bel…

Source excerpt

• Uplifting Of Bar
• Default Judgment
• Notice Of Bar
• Good Cause
• Rule 26
• Rule 27

Olwagen v Minister of Agriculture (44187/2009)

Olwagen v Minister of Agriculture (44187/2009) [2015] ZAGPPHC 382 (12 June 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

44187/2009

Judge

H K Kooverjie

The High Court granted condonation, uplifted a bar, and allowed the applicant five days to file a plea in a delayed debt dispute.

• Condonation
• Uplifting Of Bar
• Suretyship
• Acknowledgment Of Debt
• Prescription
• Costs Award

Firstrand Bank Ltd T/A Criterion Finance, A Division of Wesbank v Driescher (2008/32119)

Firstrand Bank Ltd T/A Criterion Finance, A Division of Wesbank v Driescher (2008/32119) [2014] ZAGPJHC 265 (17 October 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2008/32119

Judge

FHD Van Oosten

Interlocutory application to uplift a bar for filing a replication failed because the proposed replication was legally unsustainable and the suretyship did not bind the defendant personally.

• Uplifting Of Bar
• Jurisdiction Of Court
• Suretyship Interpretation
• Estoppel
• Automatic Bar Rule 26
• Uplifting-of-bar