Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2009] ZAFSHC 111

Eksteen v ABSA Bank Ltd and Others (4439/2007)

Eksteen v ABSA Bank Ltd and Others (4439/2007) [2009] ZAFSHC 111 (30 October 2009)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
4439/2007
Judge
Nxusani

The plaintiff gave proper notice to the defendant and called upon it to intervene regarding the eviction. He was prohibited by law from possessing the vehicle due to tampered engine and chassis numbers, as per Section 68(6) of the National Road Traffic Act. The plaintiff was not obliged to apply for a SAPVIN number, as lawful entitlement to possession was not established. The plaintiff put up a sufficient virilis defensio and did everything reasonably possible to allow the defendant to protect his possession. The defendant failed to act and is therefore liable to indemnify the plaintiff for t…

Source excerpt

  • Warranty Against Eviction
  • Instalment Sale Agreement
  • Virilis Defensio
  • Forfeiture Of Property
  • National Road Traffic Act
  • Indemnification
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2005] ZAWCHC 96

Kadwa v Gobel Franchises CC and Another (1122/03)

Kadwa v Gobel Franchises CC and Another (1122/03) [2005] ZAWCHC 96 (14 December 2005)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
1122/03
Judge
Ndita

The court found that the plaintiff was evicted from the vehicle when SARS lawfully impounded it under the Customs and Excise Act due to lack of import documentation. The contract did not specifically exclude the ex lege warranty against eviction, and the defendant failed to intervene or assist when notified. The plaintiff fulfilled the notice requirement and could not conduct a virilis defensio as the claimant's title was unassailable. The defendant, as seller, was obliged to protect the plaintiff against eviction. The plaintiff was entitled to restitution of the purchase price and costs.

Source excerpt

  • Warranty Against Eviction
  • Sale Of Goods
  • Breach Of Contract
  • Notice Requirement
  • Virilis Defensio
  • Customs And Excise Act
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.