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
Frutarom (Pty) Ltd v 6 Inches (Pty) Ltd and Another (11200/2019) [2023] ZAWCHC 179 (6 April 2023)
The High Court upheld a supplier’s claim for unpaid goods, finding the written credit agreement and suretyship proved and the debt acknowledged.
Advocatye Nemutandani v Diale Mogashoa Incorporated and Another (7222/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 627 (14 September 2021)
The High Court refused summary judgment over disputed payment terms in brief letters and allowed the first defendant to defend the claim.
Mariswe (Pty) Ltd v MEC for Roads and Public Works (411/21) [2021] ZAECBHC 2 (15 February 2021)
Summary judgment was refused in a claim for engineering fees after the court found the plaintiff had not proved a later acknowledgment interrupting prescription.
Grit Blasting Africa (Pty) Ltd v Tarman Holdings (Pty) Ltd (1551/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 49 (7 July 2020)
The High Court upheld an exception to particulars of claim in a construction payment dispute, finding the pleaded variation order lacked essential detail.
Langkilde N.O and Others v Wessels and Others (39315/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 87 (14 March 2018)
The High Court enforced a written security agreement, ordered payment of R885,000 from sale proceeds, rectified the trust number, and dismissed prescription.
Komatsu KVX LLC v Allied Wear Parts (Pty) Ltd (2013/44618) [2015] ZAGPJHC 71 (23 April 2015)
The High Court upheld an exception to a plea that was vague about defects in goods other than buckets, but dismissed a second exception about misrepresentation.
Tolerable Trading (Pty) Ltd v Ribca Trading (Pty) Ltd (14666/2011) [2015] ZAGPPHC 164 (17 February 2015)
The court found that the defendant's plea was vague and embarrassing. The denial of the existence of a written agreement, in light of the extensive amendments and initialling throughout Annexure '1', lacked sufficient particularity and created confusion regarding the true nature of the defendant's defence. The defendant's admission of payments corresponding exactly with the certified payment certificates, without providing an alternative basis for such payments, further contributed to the vagueness. The court held that the nature of the defendant's case only became clear through heads of argu…
Source excerpt
Altech Netstar Fleet Solutions (Pty) Limited v XMoor Transport CC (6731/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 12 (2 April 2014)
The court upheld an exception to particulars of claim that pleaded oral and ancillary contracts alongside a written agreement containing a non-variation clause.
Botha v Malibra Hire BK (1960/2010) [2012] ZANCHC 25 (25 May 2012)
The High Court held that no binding contract existed after the applicant’s amendments amounted to a counter-offer that the respondent never accepted.
Bateman Mineral (Edms) Bpk v DEF's Engineering & Mining Supplies BK (1003/04) [2005] ZANCHC 59 (30 September 2005)
The court found that the defendant's opposing affidavit failed to fully disclose the nature and grounds of the defence as required by Rule 32(3)(b). The defendant did not provide sufficient detail regarding the alleged oral modifications to the written agreement, nor did it specify when or with whom these were made. There was no evidence of any request for the missing controller component or dissatisfaction with the plaintiff's performance prior to the affidavit. The absence of documentation or timely complaint undermined the bona fides of the defence. The court concluded that the defence was…
Source excerpt
Explore more
