South Africa Case Law

Koutroulis and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Another (2025-121587)

Koutroulis and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Another (2025-121587) [2025] ZAGPPHC 765 (31 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-121587

Judge

E van der Schyff

The court found that the attachment of Mr. Koutroulis's Nedbank account was incomplete and invalid because notice of attachment was not given to all interested parties as required by Rule 45(8)(c)(i)(a). Rule 45(12) does not dispense with the notice requirement, and the two rules operate in tandem. The Sheriff’s own return confirmed that satisfaction of the writ had not been demanded from the judgment debtor. The court relied on Riordan v First National Bank Limited and others, which held that irregular attachments without proper notice must be set aside. Furthermore, the summons was not effe…

Source excerpt

• Attachment Of Bank Accounts
• Writ Of Execution
• Urgent Interdict
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Service Of Process

Road Accident Fund v Neethling and Another (6101/2019)

Road Accident Fund v Neethling and Another (6101/2019) [2025] ZAWCHC 242 (5 June 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6101/2019

Judge

J Cloete

The High Court dismissed the RAF’s urgent application to stay execution of a writ, holding that appeals in other matters did not affect this judgment.

• Stay Of Execution
• Writ Of Execution
• Stare Decisis
• Abuse Of Process
• Stay-of-execution
• Writ-of-execution

Rand Water v Taroline (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024-124556)

Rand Water v Taroline (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024-124556) [2025] ZAGPPHC 571 (4 June 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024-124556

Judge

MPN Mbongwe

The High Court set aside an urgent writ of execution after finding the debt had already been paid and the first respondent lacked standing to enforce it.

• Writ Of Execution
• Locus Standi
• Arbitration Award Enforcement
• Debt Settlement
• Writ-of-execution
• Locus-standi

Roadseal (Pty) Ltd v Maduludi (Pty) Ltd and Another (7914/2020)

Roadseal (Pty) Ltd v Maduludi (Pty) Ltd and Another (7914/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 474 (15 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7914/2020

Judge

H F Jacobs

The court removed an application to declare immovable property specially executable under Rule 46(1) after finding the underlying default judgment did not clearly run against both defendants.

• Default Judgment
• Writ Of Execution
• Rule 46 Application
• Service Of Process
• Costs Order
• Rule-46

Calitz v Buys N.O and Others (2696/2024)

Calitz v Buys N.O and Others (2696/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 130 (8 May 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2696/2024

Judge

Boonzaaier AJ

The High Court refused rescission of a default judgment and declined to set aside the writ, finding no excusable default or bona fide defence.

• Default Judgment
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Writ Of Execution
• Lease Agreement
• Parol Evidence Rule
• Rescission-of-judgment

Manqele and Another v SB Guarentee Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/050021)

Manqele and Another v SB Guarentee Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/050021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 381 (24 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/050021

Judge

A Mitchell

The court found that the sheriff's return of service, while prima facie evidence, was not conclusive in this case. Mr Manqele provided credible and corroborated evidence that he was not present at the property on the alleged service date, thus discharging the onus on a balance of probabilities. The sheriff's affidavit lacked sufficient verification of identity, and the supporting evidence did not establish personal service. As a result, the default judgment and writ of execution were erroneously granted and must be rescinded. Furthermore, since the money judgment against Ms Magakoa was inextr…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Personal Service
• Primary Residence Execution
• Uniform Rule 46a
• Default Judgment
• Writ Of Execution

Newnet Properties (Pty) Ltd t/a Sunshine Hospital v Road Accident Fund (1150/2023)

Newnet Properties (Pty) Ltd t/a Sunshine Hospital v Road Accident Fund (1150/2023) [2025] ZASCA 19 (14 March 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1150/2023

Judges

Mocumie, Nicholls, Smith, Musi, Modiba

The SCA held that the RAF could not reopen final judgments by compelling supplier information after judgment, and it failed to justify suspension of execution.

• Finality Of Court Orders
• Writ Of Execution
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Interim Interdict
• Rule 45a Suspension
• Finality-of-court-orders

Ngqaza v Sebotse Construction CC and Others (J4/25)

Ngqaza v Sebotse Construction CC and Others (J4/25) [2025] ZALCJHB 99 (12 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J4/25

Judge

B Ramji

The application was dismissed because the relief sought—a court order directing the sheriff to attach bank accounts for the satisfaction of judgment debts—amounts to a writ of execution for the attachment of incorporeal property. The Labour Court is not competent to order such a writ; instead, the procedure is governed by Uniform Rule 45(12)(a), which allows for the attachment without a prior court application. The applicant must obtain a writ, and any non-compliance by the garnishee may then be brought before the court. The applicant's inability to locate the first respondent and previous un…

Source excerpt

• Writ Of Execution
• Attachment Of Incorporeal Property
• Garnishee Procedure
• Uniform Rule 45

Mokoma v M-Njr and Olwethu Consulting (Pty) Ltd and Others (J3/25)

Mokoma v M-Njr and Olwethu Consulting (Pty) Ltd and Others (J3/25) [2025] ZALCJHB 100 (11 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J03/25

Judge

Ramji

The Labour Court is not competent to grant an order for attachment or execution of bank accounts to satisfy a judgment debt. The correct procedure is for the judgment creditor to approach the Registrar for a writ of execution, which the sheriff may then use to attach the relevant incorporeal property, such as bank accounts, without the necessity of a prior court application. The Uniform Rules of Court and Labour Court Rule 61 make clear that judicial involvement is not required for attachment of movables or incorporeal property, including those held by third parties. The application brought b…

Source excerpt

• Writ Of Execution
• Attachment Of Incorporeal Property
• Labour Court Procedure
• Costs Award Enforcement

Masoanganye N.O v Nedbank Limited and Others (2024/089403)

Masoanganye N.O v Nedbank Limited and Others (2024/089403) [2025] ZAGPPHC 47 (27 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024/089403

Judge

Dippenaar

The court found that, following the variation of the forfeiture order, both the capital amount and the accrued interest on the R35 million vested in the State. The forfeiture order did not create a debtor-creditor relationship between the curator (representing the State) and the DRC, and thus no debt existed that could be attached under rule 45(12). The DRC had no claim against the curator, and the assets were not subject to execution by the tenth respondent. The provisions of POCA make clear that forfeiture is to the State, not to any other party, and any rights not exercisable by the State…

Source excerpt

• Interim Interdict
• Writ Of Execution
• Forfeiture Order
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Curatorship
• Attachment Of Debt