South Africa Case Law

Carnaby Way Investments (Pty) Ltd v Koch and Others (532/2024)

Carnaby Way Investments (Pty) Ltd v Koch and Others (532/2024) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 73 (11 August 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

532/2024

Judge

Msibi AJ

The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the criminal evidential burden of proof that the first respondent was aware of the court order. Although the first respondent was present during the proceedings, there was no evidence that the order was served on her or brought to her attention prior to the present application. Without proof of knowledge, the requirements for contempt, specifically wilfulness and mala fides, could not be established beyond reasonable doubt. The application for contempt was therefore dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Service Of Court Orders
• Wilful Disobedience
• Burden Of Proof

E.J.L v H.J.C.L (3254/2024)

E.J.L v H.J.C.L (3254/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 390 (29 November 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3254/2024

Judge

Mpama AJ

The High Court found the respondent in contempt for non-compliance with a maintenance order, imposed a suspended 30-day jail term, and ordered compliance.

• Maintenance Order
• Contempt Of Court
• Rule 43 Application
• Wilful Disobedience
• Contempt-of-court
• Maintenance-orders

D.J.V.R v J.F.J.V.R (830/2022)

D.J.V.R v J.F.J.V.R (830/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 294 (20 September 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

830/2022

Judge

Ramdeyal AJ

The court found that while the respondent was obliged to comply with the court orders and should have applied for a variation if unable to do so, he provided a detailed explanation for his late payments and actions regarding the domestic worker. The respondent's affidavit established a reasonable doubt that his non-compliance was not wilful or mala fide. Applying the Plascon-Evans rule, the matter was decided on the respondent's version, which was not fictitious or clearly untenable. The respondent discharged the evidentiary burden, and contempt was not established beyond reasonable doubt.

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Maintenance Orders
• Rule 43 Applications
• Wilful Disobedience
• Variation Of Court Order

South African Legal Practice Council v Janse Van Rensburg (3938/2023)

South African Legal Practice Council v Janse Van Rensburg (3938/2023) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 42 (13 June 2024)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

3938/2023

Judge

Roelofse

The court found that Ms Van Rensburg was aware of the suspension order and the section 18(3) order, and that she wilfully disobeyed these orders by continuing to practice as an attorney and representing clients in court. Her claims of pending appeals were false and constituted deliberate misrepresentation to the court, the LPC, and other parties. The respondent's reliance on locus standi under section 38 of the Constitution was found to be a fabrication, as her conduct and correspondence consistently indicated she was acting as an attorney. The defence that the orders were nullities was rejec…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Legal Practitioner Suspension
• Wilful Disobedience
• Perjury
• Section 18 Superior Courts Act

M.S v P.S - Leave to Appeal (1334/2018)

M.S v P.S - Leave to Appeal (1334/2018) [2024] ZAFSHC 64 (5 March 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1334/2018

Judge

Naidoo

The High Court refused leave to appeal in a maintenance and settlement dispute, finding no reasonable prospects of success or compelling reason under section 17.

• Maintenance Obligation
• Deed Of Settlement
• Leave To Appeal
• Wilful Disobedience
• Interpretation Of Contract
• Leave-to-appeal

Maluleke v Ranchod and Others (215/2023)

Maluleke v Ranchod and Others (215/2023) [2023] ZALMPPHC 23 (24 May 2023)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

215/2023

Judge

SS Mthimkulu

The High Court dismissed a contempt application, finding the respondents were not ordered to oppose the matter and had not acted wilfully or mala fide.

• Contempt Of Court
• Civil Contempt
• Wilful Disobedience
• Standard Of Proof
• Costs Order
• Contempt-of-court

Nedbank Limited v Campbell (6350/2021)

Nedbank Limited v Campbell (6350/2021) [2023] ZAWCHC 88 (2 May 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6350/2021

Judge

P. S. Van Zyl

The High Court dismissed Nedbank’s contempt and National Credit Act application after finding the respondent had not wilfully disobeyed the order.

• Civil Contempt Of Court
• National Credit Act
• Wilful Disobedience
• Burden Of Proof
• Statutory Obligation To Disclose
• Civil-contempt

Standard Bank of South Africa v Retief N.O and Others (1521/2020)

Standard Bank of South Africa v Retief N.O and Others (1521/2020) [2023] ZANCHC 31 (17 February 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1521/2020

Judge

Mamosebo

The High Court found the respondents guilty of contempt for failing to comply with a court-ordered settlement and regulatory agreement concerning the sale of farms.

• Contempt Of Court
• Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement
• Wilful Disobedience
• Costs Order
• Motion Proceedings
• Contempt-of-court

Cilibia v Cilibia (3460/2021)

Cilibia v Cilibia (3460/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 132 (17 May 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3460/2021

Judge

Snellenburg, AJ

The respondent admitted non-compliance with the maintenance order but attempted to justify her conduct by claiming uncertainty regarding the method of payment and financial constraints. The court found these explanations contrived and rejected the assertion that payment into the attorney's account was a mistake. The requirements for contempt were established: a valid order existed, the respondent had knowledge of it, and failed to comply. The presumption of wilfulness and mala fides was not rebutted by the respondent. The court granted condonation for the late filing of the answering affidavi…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Contempt Of Court
• Rule 43 Proceedings
• Wilful Disobedience
• Condonation
• Coercive Orders

Department of Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries v B Xulu & Partners Incorporated and Others (6189/2019)

Department of Environmental Affairs, Forestry and Fisheries v B Xulu & Partners Incorporated and Others (6189/2019) [2021] ZAWCHC 83; [2021] 3 All SA 166 (WCC) (4 May 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6189/2019

Judge

Pangarker

The High Court found B Xulu & Partners and Barnabas Xulu in contempt of multiple prior orders, imposed a fine, suspended imprisonment, and litigation restrictions.

• Civil Contempt Of Court
• Wilful Disobedience
• Enforcement Of Court Orders
• Attorney Ethics
• Anti Dissipation Order
• Civil-contempt-of-court