IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION)"

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION) REPORTABLE CASE NO: 04/9610 In the matter between: DITEDU. DINEO ROSLYN Plaintiff and TAYOB, YOUSHA Defendant JUDGMENT GOLDSTEIN J: [1] The plaintiff, a 42 year old woman sues the defendant, who is an attorney, for damages in the sum of R She alleges in her particulars of claim that she was involved in a collision on 3 March 2000, that she sustained various bodily injuries, and suffered damages in the amount of R , that she gave the defendant a written mandate to lodge a

2 2 claim for her damages against the Road Accident Fund constituted by Act 56 of 1996, and that he performed his services negligently and settled her claim for an amount of R , of which she received R She alleges that he failed to advise her not to accept the offer made by the Road Accident Fund. [2] The defendant pleads specially that the claim has prescribed. Paragraph 8 of the amended plea, handed to me at the inception of the hearing before me, reads as follows: The Plaintiff is deemed to have acquired knowledge of the facts from which her claim arises on the 28 th September 2000, alternatively, the 26 th October 2000, further alternatively before the 22 nd April During argument Mr Kruger, who appeared for the defendant, stated that his case was that the plaintiff was deemed to have acquired knowledge of the facts from which her claim arose before 22 April 2001; the latter date is the date upon which the summons was served upon the defendant. [3] The parties have requested me at this stage of the proceedings to determine only the issue of prescription raised by the special plea. The defendant, who bears the onus of proof, gave evidence before me and called two witnesses. For the plaintiff only she gave evidence. It is clear from the evidence that, on 14 March 2000, the plaintiff gave the defendant a written mandate to act as her attorney, the terms of which included his

3 3 power to settle her claim on her behalf. It appears that the Road Accident Fund thereafter on 7 September 2000 offered an amount of R5013,00 in settlement of the claim, together with a contribution to costs of R On 12 September 2000 the defendant accepted the offer, and on 20 November 2000, after the Road Accident Fund had paid the amount of the settlement, the plaintiff was paid an amount of R by a Close Corporation known as CL Administrators CC, with which the defendant had contracted to do the work involved. The plaintiff testified that she was satisfied with the amount which she regarded as substantial. [4] Section 12 of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969 reads as follows in so far as it is relevant: (1) Subject to the provisions of subsection... (3), prescription shall commence to run as soon as the debt is due. (2) (3) A debt shall not be deemed to be due until the creditor has knowledge of the identity of the debtor and of the facts from which the debt arises: Provided that a creditor shall be deemed to have such knowledge if he could have acquired it by exercising reasonable care. [5] Mr Kruger argues that on 20 November 2000 the plaintiff had knowledge of the identity of her debtor, the defendant, and of the facts from which the debt arose. At that stage, the argument continues, she knew the extent of her injuries, and the extent of the compensation paid to her, and she must have had knowledge that the amount was too low. In the alternative,

4 4 counsel contended that with the exercise of reasonable care she ought to have acquired such knowledge. Counsel sought support for his submissions in Van Staden v Fourie 1989(3) SA 200 (A) at 216 C E where the following appears: Die probleem in die onderhawige geval draai om die toepassing van die woorde 'die feite waaruit die skuld ontstaan' in art 12(3) van die Verjaringswet. Die respondent was klaarblyklik bewus van die basiese feite. Hy het geweet wat die aard en inhoud van sy kontrak was. Uiteraard was hy bewus daarvan dat feitlik geen van die besonderhede vereis deur art 17 van die Wet daarin opgeneem was nie. Ook het hy geweet dat die stukke waarna in die artikel verwys word, nie die kontrak vergesel het nie. Hy was dus bewus van die feite wat aangetoon het dat art 17 van die Wet nie nagekom is nie. Hy het geweet dat hy betalings kragtens die kontrak gemaak het. Myns insiens was hy dus van meet af aan ten volle bewus van al die feite wat aanleiding gegee het tot die spesiale remedies voorgeskryf deur art 18 van die Wet. 'n Mens kan aanvaar dat hy eers later bewus geword het van watter vereistes deur art 17 van die Wet gestel word, en van watter regte hy verkry het toe die appellant nie hierdie vereistes nagekom het nie. Artikel 12(3) van die Verjaringswet stel egter nie die aanvang van verjaring uit totdat die skuldeiser die volle omvang van sy regte uitgevind het nie. Die toegewing wat die Verjaringswet in hierdie verband maak, is beperk tot kennis van 'die feite waaruit die skuld ontstaan'. Myns insiens het die respondent reeds sodanige kennis gehad toe hy die eerste betaling gemaak het. [6] Mr Kruger contended that it is the law which indicates that the award was too low, and that it is the law which determines that the defendant acted negligently, and that accordingly the plaintiff was not protected at all by the provisions of section 12(3), which only relates to facts. [7] In paragraph 11 of her particulars of claim the plaintiff alleges that the Defendant was negligent in the performance of his duties in one or more or all of the following respects:

5 he failed to properly investigate the nature and extent of the Plaintiff s injuries in that he failed to refer the Plaintiff to any medical specialists for the purposes of obtaining medico-legal reports; 11.2 he failed to properly investigate and determine the Plaintiff s claim for general damages; 11.3 he failed to claim for the costs of the Plaintiff s future medical treatment; 11.4 he failed to lodge a claim for the Plaintiff s loss of earnings; 11.5 he settled the Plaintiff s claim for an amount of R5 013, 00. Arguably these allegations indicate that the plaintiff s case of negligence against the defendant does depend on a number of facts. However, I am prepared to accept, in the defendant s favour, that the plaintiff s failure to appreciate that she had been wronged resulted only from her ignorance of the law. [8] In my view, once a layman consults an attorney, or other legal expert, and the latter furnishes him or her with an opinion as to the law, which opinion proves to be erroneous, the furnishing of that erroneous opinion is a fact for the purposes of section 12(3). Van Staden was concerned with a plaintiff s ignorance of the law, and not with the interposing of an opinion by a legal expert as to such law. The same applies to the case Eskom v Bojanala Platinum District Municipality, an unreported judgment of Moseneke J (as he then was) in the Transvaal Provincial Division, cited by John Saner in his Prescription in South African Law (updated to 31 May 2005) at page 3-44(2). The plaintiff in that case, although armed with senior counsel s opinion on its claim, and a judgment of the Transvaal

6 6 Provincial Division, waited until the Supreme Court of Appeal had pronounced on the matter before issuing summons against the defendant. Moseneke J rejected the contention that the claimant was entitled to await legal certainty before seeking to enforce its claim. That case is different from the present. In Eskom the plaintiff was armed with an opinion of counsel which, I gather, confirmed its right to sue. In the present case the plaintiff was in effect provided with an opinion by her attorney which was wrong in law. [9] If Mr Kruger s contention were to be accepted, laymen contracting with attorneys for the furnishing of their expertise in the knowledge of the law would be without a remedy in respect of any errors made by such attorneys, and discovered more than 3 years after the rendering of the service concerned. This would be an absurd result especially in the case of commercial contracts of long duration which the legislature could not have intended. Moreover section 39(2) of the Constitution enjoins me (w)hen interpreting any legislation, (to) promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. In Van Zijl v Hoogenhout 2005(2) SA 93 (SCA) Heher JA said the following at 98I: In addition, the plaintiff is entitled to the benefits of a constitutional dispensation that promotes, rather than inhibits, access to courts of law. The present plaintiff is, of course, entitled to the same benefits.

7 7 [10] It is significant too that in Van Staden Grosskopf JA stated at 216G that he expressed no opinion on the possibility of the voidness of a contract being a fact for the purposes of section 12(3) in appropriate circumstances. [11] Clearly the plaintiff was unaware, after she received the amount of the settlement, that her attorney had acted negligently. She was first apprised of this during 2003 when she consulted with her present attorney, after she was taken to him as a potential witness of the collision of 3 March 2000, in which she had been injured. It follows that the defendant is restricted to relying on the proviso to section 12(3). I am enjoined by authority in adjudicating upon the standard of care required of the plaintiff to have regard to subjective and objective factors. I must postulate a diligens paterfamilias falling within her group or particular circumstances. Would such a person, I must ask, have sought to acquire the necessary knowledge for her to have brought this action within approximately 5 months of the settlement? See Administrator, Cape v Olpin 1996(1) SA 569 (C) at [12] In this regard, it is relevant to note that the plaintiff s educational level did not advance beyond standard three, since she left school half way through standard four. She is not able to read English, although she did state in re-examination that she was able to understand it, but not able to speak the language. During the month before the collision she was

8 8 economically active in some or other enterprise with a view to earning commission, but she earned none in that time; for a year before that she had been unemployed, she said. Previously she had worked as a domestic servant, and also as a washer woman. She was under the impression that the amount she obtained was a substantial sum, and she did not suspect that her attorney had not acted properly in settling her claim. The defendant bears the onus of proving that, in acting as she did, she failed to meet the standard of care required by section 12(3). Given her limited education and degree of sophistication, I am unable to find that the defendant discharged this onus. [13] Mr Kruger contended that two factors ought to have made the plaintiff suspicious about the defendant s conduct, or that of his agent. First, counsel relied on the plaintiff s evidence that when she was telephoned to attend on the offices of what she thought were those of her attorneys, she was told to come alone, and that, when asked why this was so, the conversation was terminated by the person to whom she was speaking putting down the telephone. In my view, the conduct referred to is not logically connected to the erroneous advice the plaintiff allegedly received and, in any event, as counsel for the plaintiff suggested, the conduct may be explained on the basis that the plaintiff was about to receive an amount of money, possibly in cash, and it would have been safer for her to receive it alone. Secondly, counsel referred to the paucity of the amount paid to

9 9 the plaintiff. Of course, the smallness of the amount is a relative issue. To a washer woman or domestic servant the amount may well have appeared substantial. In support of his submission in this regard counsel referred to evidence he solicited under cross examination: the plaintiff stated that when she worked as a washer woman she was paid piecemeal, if I understood her evidence correctly, and, when pressed, she said that she earned R per week, and when pressed further, that this amounted to R per month. The evidence concerned was not preceded by any related evidence in chief, and my impression was that the plaintiff herself was quite uncertain of the figures she was providing. Furthermore, it is by no means clear to me that a plaintiff, as unsophisticated as this one is, would have understood that she was entitled to compensation for loss of earnings. [14] It follows from the aforegoing that the defendant failed to discharge the onus resting upon him and that the special plea falls to be dismissed. I make the following order: 1. The special plea is dismissed. 2. The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff s costs of the trial of 17, 18 and 19 August E L GOLDSTEIN JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION)

10 10 For the plaintiff: C Vallaro Instructed by: Anthony Rome For the defendant: H J Kruger Instructed by: Maluleke, Msimang & Associates Date of hearing: 17, 18, and 19 August 2005 Date of judgment: 24 August 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY JUDGMENT 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 2013/26724 (1) REPORTABLE: YES (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES (3) REVISED. YES. 3 February 2015... DATE SIGNATURE

More information

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case CCT 200/16 SINETHEMBA MTOKONYA Applicant and MINISTER OF POLICE Respondent Neutral citation: Mtokonya v Minister of Police [2017] ZACC 33

More information

FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN

FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN NOT REPORTABLE PARTIES: MBANJWA INC AND ALBANY AUTO TRIMMERS Registrar: CA 127/09 Magistrate: High Court: EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN

More information

[1] The Appellant, accused 2, is a 25 year old man, who was charged with a. co-accused, accused no. 1, in the Thaba N chu Regional Court on two

[1] The Appellant, accused 2, is a 25 year old man, who was charged with a. co-accused, accused no. 1, in the Thaba N chu Regional Court on two IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Appeal No. : A13/2002 In the appeal between: MICHAEL MOLUSI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: C.J. MUSI J et MILTON AJ

More information

JUDGMENT. 1 I am required to decide the disputes disclosed by the defendant's. special plea of prescription raised in defence to the plaintiffs claim.

JUDGMENT. 1 I am required to decide the disputes disclosed by the defendant's. special plea of prescription raised in defence to the plaintiffs claim. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA CASE NO: 5664/2011 In the matter between: EDWARD THOMPSON Plaintiff and CITY OF TSHWANE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY Defendant JUDGMENT Tuchten

More information

Is s 2(3) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953 finally tailored? Prof Francois du Toit. FISA Conference. September 2012

Is s 2(3) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953 finally tailored? Prof Francois du Toit. FISA Conference. September 2012 Is s 2(3) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953 finally tailored? Prof Francois du Toit FISA Conference September 2012 John H Langbein, Substantial compliance with the Wills Act 1975 Harvard Law Review 489 498: What

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION. In the matter between: FAIROAKS INVESTMENT HOLDI GS (PTY) LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION. In the matter between: FAIROAKS INVESTMENT HOLDI GS (PTY) LTD IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION Date: 02/02/2007 Case no: 9858/2005 UNREPORTABLE In the matter between: FAIROAKS INVESTMENT HOLDI GS (PTY) LTD WILLOW FALLS ESTATE Case no:

More information

REPORTABLE CASE NO: 397/96 THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA. In the matter between: S A EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

REPORTABLE CASE NO: 397/96 THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA. In the matter between: S A EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. REPORTABLE CASE NO: 397/96 THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: S A EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD APPELLANT and LYNNE PRETORIUS RESPONDENT CORAM: SMALBERGER, MARAIS, SCHUTZ,

More information

FILING SHEET FOR HIGH COURT, BISHO JUDGMENT MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY & ANO. [1] Case Number: 317/05

FILING SHEET FOR HIGH COURT, BISHO JUDGMENT MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY & ANO. [1] Case Number: 317/05 FILING SHEET FOR HIGH COURT, BISHO JUDGMENT PARTIES: LUMKA TWALO vs MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY & ANO [1] Case Number: 317/05 DATE HEARD: 26 November 2008 JUDGMENT DELIVERED: 7 January 2009 JUDGE: Y

More information

R E A S O N S F O R J U D G M E N T. applicant also being tried on a further charge of indecent assault. It was alleged

R E A S O N S F O R J U D G M E N T. applicant also being tried on a further charge of indecent assault. It was alleged IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (SOUTH EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION) In the matter between Case No.: CC15/02 Date available: LIONEL FOURIE First Applicant TONY McCARTHY Second Applicant NATHAN NIEKERK

More information

JUDGMENT. [1] On Thursday 28 March 2002 at approximately 14h00, the appellant s

JUDGMENT. [1] On Thursday 28 March 2002 at approximately 14h00, the appellant s IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NATAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION REPORTABLE CASE NO: AR 47/2008 In the matter between: A CHETTY APPELLANT and ROAD ACCIDENT FUND RESPONDENT JUDGMENT GORVEN J [1] On Thursday

More information

ABSOLOM MALINGA APPELLANT. and

ABSOLOM MALINGA APPELLANT. and 1987-05- 27 ABSOLOM MALINGA APPELLANT and THE STATE RESPONDENT /ccc CASE NO. 388/86 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between ABSOLOM MALINGA APPELLANT and THE STATE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO HELD AT MASERU C OF A (CIV) NO.18/2016 LESOTHO NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO HELD AT MASERU C OF A (CIV) NO.18/2016 LESOTHO NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO HELD AT MASERU C OF A (CIV) NO.18/2016 In the matter between:- LESOTHO NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED APPELLANT and TSEKISO POULO RESPONDENT CORAM: FARLAM,

More information

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA RANDBURG CASE NUMBER: LCC 15R/04 In chambers: MOLOTO J MAGISTRATE S COURT CASE NUMBER: 95/02 Decided on: 3 March 2004 In the review proceedings in the case between:

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. LESLIE MILDENHALL TROLLIP t/a PROPERTY SOLUTIONS. HANCKE, J et FISCHER, AJ

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. LESLIE MILDENHALL TROLLIP t/a PROPERTY SOLUTIONS. HANCKE, J et FISCHER, AJ FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the appeal between:- Appeal No. : A297/10 JOHANNES STEPHANUS LATEGAN MARLET LATEGAN First Appellant Second Appellant and LESLIE MILDENHALL

More information

LL Case No 247/1989 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA APPELLATE DIVISION. In the matter between: and. VAN HEERDEN, SMALBERGER JJA et PREISS AJA

LL Case No 247/1989 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA APPELLATE DIVISION. In the matter between: and. VAN HEERDEN, SMALBERGER JJA et PREISS AJA LL Case No 247/1989 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA APPELLATE DIVISION In the matter between: THOMAS MAMITSA Appellant and JULIUS MOSES KHUMALO Respondent CORAM: VAN HEERDEN, SMALBERGER JJA et PREISS

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No.: 1116/2006. In the case between: ALL GOOD THINGS 149 CC.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No.: 1116/2006. In the case between: ALL GOOD THINGS 149 CC. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the case between: Case No.: 1116/2006 ALL GOOD THINGS 149 CC Plaintiff and WASCON SIVIEL CC WOUTER WASSERMAN 2 nd Defendant

More information

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case CCT 29/15 DIRK LINKS Applicant and MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, NORTHERN CAPE PROVINCE Respondent Neutral citation:

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No 470/96 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter of: SANTAM LIMITED Appellant and MOHAMED NAEEM SAYED Respondent CORAM: VAN HEERDEN DCJ, HOWIE, PLEWMAN JJA, FARLAM et NGOEPE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Reportable: YES/NO Of Interest to other Judges: YES/NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/NO In the matter between: LEON BOSMAN N.O. IZAK

More information

IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA

IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA V IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA Not reportable In the matter between - CASE NO: 2015/54483 HENDRIK ADRIAAN ROETS Applicant And MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY MINISTER

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. In the matter between:- FRANCIS RALENTSOE MOLOI

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. In the matter between:- FRANCIS RALENTSOE MOLOI FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No. : 3861/2013 In the matter between:- FRANCIS RALENTSOE MOLOI Applicant and MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL

More information

MEC: EDUCATION - WESTERN CAPE v STRAUSS JUDGMENT

MEC: EDUCATION - WESTERN CAPE v STRAUSS JUDGMENT MEC: EDUCATION - WESTERN CAPE v STRAUSS FORUM : SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE : MALAN AJA CASE NO : 640/06 DATE : 28 NOVEMBER 2007 JUDGMENT Judgement: Malan AJA: [1] This is an appeal with leave of the

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO: 588/2007 THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY Appellant and AUGUSTUS JOHN DE WITT Respondent Neutral citation: Minister of Safety and Security v De Witt

More information

RSA AARTAPPELSAAD BEURS (EDMS) BPK WELDAAD BOERDERY (EDMS) BPK. [1] This is an application for provisional sentence for the amount

RSA AARTAPPELSAAD BEURS (EDMS) BPK WELDAAD BOERDERY (EDMS) BPK. [1] This is an application for provisional sentence for the amount FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case No.: 3852/2010 RSA AARTAPPELSAAD BEURS (EDMS) BPK Plaintiff and WELDAAD BOERDERY (EDMS) BPK Defendant JUDGEMENT:

More information

UITSPRAAK IN DIE NOORD GAUTENG HOE HOF PRETORIA (REPUBL1EK VAN SUID-AFRIKA) ) seres SAAKNOMMER: 38798/2006. In die saak tussen: Applikant

UITSPRAAK IN DIE NOORD GAUTENG HOE HOF PRETORIA (REPUBL1EK VAN SUID-AFRIKA) ) seres SAAKNOMMER: 38798/2006. In die saak tussen: Applikant IN DIE NOORD GAUTENG HOE HOF PRETORIA (REPUBL1EK VAN SUID-AFRIKA) In die saak tussen: VERONICA KRETSCHMER SAAKNOMMER: 38798/2006 Applikant en 3ROLL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT (EDMS) 3PK (REGISTRASIENOMMER 199S/C15132/07)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) PETER MOHLABA. and WINSTON NKOPODI JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) PETER MOHLABA. and WINSTON NKOPODI JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the matter between: Case No.: Civil Appeal 3/2003 PETER MOHLABA and WINSTON NKOPODI JUDGMENT HENDRICKS AJ: INTRODUCTION This is

More information

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Held at RANDBURG CASE NUMBER : LCC9R/98 In the matter concerning M P DU TOIT Plaintiff and LEWAK LE KAY alias LEWAK LANGTREY Defendant JUDGMENT MOLOTO J : [1] The

More information

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) FRANCOIS JOHANNES WIUM JUDGMENT DELIVERED 28 MAY 2104

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) FRANCOIS JOHANNES WIUM JUDGMENT DELIVERED 28 MAY 2104 REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Case no: 4567/2009 In the matter between: FRANCOIS JOHANNES WIUM Plaintiff and FREDERICK ARIJS Defendant JUDGMENT

More information

2 No GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 16 SEPTEMBER 2010 Act No, 5 of 2010 SOCIAL ASSISTANCE AMENDMENT ACT GENERAL EXPLANATORY NOTE: Words in bold type

2 No GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 16 SEPTEMBER 2010 Act No, 5 of 2010 SOCIAL ASSISTANCE AMENDMENT ACT GENERAL EXPLANATORY NOTE: Words in bold type Vol. 543 Cape Town, 16 September2010 No. 33562 Kaapstad, THE PRESIDENCY DIE PRESIDENSIE No. 830 16 September 2010 Nr. 830 16 September 2010 It is hereby notified that the President has assented to the

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CHRISTOPHER EDWARD MARTIN DAMON FOR THE APPLICANT : ADV.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CHRISTOPHER EDWARD MARTIN DAMON FOR THE APPLICANT : ADV. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) REPORTABLE Case No: 1601/09 In the matter between: CHRISTOPHER EDWARD MARTIN DAMON Applicant and SAHRON DAMON BFP ATTORNEYS THE

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Reportable Case No: 353/2016 FACTAPROPS 1052 CC ISMAIL EBRAHIM DARSOT FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT and LAND AND AGRICULTURAL

More information

REPORTABLE Case number: 105/2000 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA. ABSA BANK LIMITED t/a VOLKSKAS BANK

REPORTABLE Case number: 105/2000 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA. ABSA BANK LIMITED t/a VOLKSKAS BANK In the matter between: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA REPORTABLE Case number: 105/2000 ABSA BANK LIMITED t/a VOLKSKAS BANK APPELLANT and JAN HENDRIK NEL PAGE HENDRIK VAN NIEKERK NO FIRST

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT GAUTENG MEC FOR HEALTH 3P CONSULTING (PTY) LTD

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT GAUTENG MEC FOR HEALTH 3P CONSULTING (PTY) LTD THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 199/10 In the matter between: GAUTENG MEC FOR HEALTH Appellant and 3P CONSULTING (PTY) LTD Respondent Neutral Citation: Coram: Gauteng MEC

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) TRANSVAAL) (EDMS) BPK : PLAINTIFF

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) TRANSVAAL) (EDMS) BPK : PLAINTIFF IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CASE NO.:260/04 In the matter between: GROUP 10 HOUSING (WESTERN TRANSVAAL) (EDMS) BPK : PLAINTIFF AND DOMANN GROUP PROPERTIES (PTY)

More information

DEPARTEMENT VAN OPENBARE WERKE

DEPARTEMENT VAN OPENBARE WERKE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 7382/08 In the matter between:- RUWACON (EDMS) BPK Applicant versus DEPARTEMENT VAN OPENBARE WERKE Respondent CORAM: H.M. MUSI,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: 7257/2015 Date: 30 August 2016 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES: YES/NO

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Case No.: A183/2013 DANNY MEKGOE Applicant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: DAFFUE, J et NAIDOO, J JUDGMENT BY:

More information

HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN

HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between:- Case Number : 99/2014 THE STATE and RETHABILE NTSHONYANE THABANG NTSHONYANE CORAM: DAFFUE, J et MURRAY, AJ JUDGMENT

More information

2016 SEPTEMBER 16 CASE No 802/2015

2016 SEPTEMBER 16 CASE No 802/2015 1 S v DW NORTHERN CAPE DIVISION, KIMBERLEY KGOMO JP and MAMOSEBO J 2016 SEPTEMBER 16 CASE No 802/2015 Mamosebo J (Kgomo JP concurring): [1] This is a special review in terms of s 304A of the Criminal Procedure

More information

VAN ZYL, J et MOCUMIE, J. [1] The accused was charged with housebreaking with intent to. commit an offence unknown to the prosecutor.

VAN ZYL, J et MOCUMIE, J. [1] The accused was charged with housebreaking with intent to. commit an offence unknown to the prosecutor. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the review between:- THE STATE versus OTHNIEL SELLO MAIEANE Review No. : 92/2008 CORAM: VAN ZYL, J et MOCUMIE, J JUDGMENT BY:

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CARLLO ANDRIAS GAGIANO

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CARLLO ANDRIAS GAGIANO FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the review between: Review No. : 4860/07 CARLLO ANDRIAS GAGIANO Plaintiff and CARRLO ANDRIAS GAGIANO (SNR) RACHEL MAGDALENA GAGIANO THERESA

More information

Before: The Hon. Mr Justice Le Grange The Hon. Mr Binns-Ward The Hon. Ms Acting Justice Magona

Before: The Hon. Mr Justice Le Grange The Hon. Mr Binns-Ward The Hon. Ms Acting Justice Magona Republic of South Africa IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Appeal Case No: A371/2013 Trial Case No. 4673/2005 Before: The Hon. Mr Justice Le Grange The Hon. Mr Binns-Ward

More information

HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) ..._...,... SIGNATURE JUDGMENT

HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) ..._...,... SIGNATURE JUDGMENT ,, HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) ( 1) (2) (3) REPORTABLE: >E5/NO OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: )'.,B'lNO REVISED, DATE C :J(l_l..._....,... SIGNATURE Case no. A170/2013 In the

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) JUDGMENT. [1] The plaintiff claims payment from the defendant in the amount of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) JUDGMENT. [1] The plaintiff claims payment from the defendant in the amount of IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case No: 36428/2014 In the matter between: GERHARD PRETORIUS ll--/ < /'J

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION CASE: 504/07. In the matter between: MORETELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY APPLICANT.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION CASE: 504/07. In the matter between: MORETELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY APPLICANT. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION CASE: 504/07 In the matter between: MORETELE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY APPLICANT and NKADIMENG BOTLHALE TRAINING AND CONSULTANCY CC RESPONDENT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) CA 301/2001 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: MICHELE COLAVITA APPLICANT AND SAMSTOCK PORTFOLIO PROPERTIES (PTY LIMITED RESPONDENT JUDGMENT FOR

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT) IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT) Case number 20762/2006 Date: 19 June 2009 In the matter between: EDNA BONFIGLIO Plaintiff and ATB CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS (SA) Defendant JUDGMENT

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) Case No 275/89 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between: THE MINISTER OF LAW AND ORDER Appellant AND ABDUL AZIZ KADER Respondent CORAM: HOEXTER, E M GROSSKOPF, STEYN,

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT FIRST NATIONAL BANK (A DIVISION OF FIRSTRAND BANK LTD) FIRST APPELLANT SCENEMATIC ONE (PTY) LTD

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT FIRST NATIONAL BANK (A DIVISION OF FIRSTRAND BANK LTD) FIRST APPELLANT SCENEMATIC ONE (PTY) LTD THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case No: 20832/14 In the matter between: FIRST NATIONAL BANK (A DIVISION OF FIRSTRAND BANK LTD) FIRST APPELLANT THOMAS JOHANNES NAUDE

More information

IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) APPEAL CASE NO : A5044/09 DATE: 18/08/2010 In the matter between:

IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) APPEAL CASE NO : A5044/09 DATE: 18/08/2010 In the matter between: IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) APPEAL CASE NO : A5044/09 DATE: 18/08/2010 In the matter between: HENRY GEORGE DAVID COCHRANE Appellant (Respondent a quo) and THE

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Reportable Case No: 1036/2016 ROAD ACCIDENT FUND APPELLANT and KHOMOTSO POLLY MPHIRIME RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Road Accident

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Review number. : 508/2010 In the review matter between: THE STATE and LEETO MAKEKA CORAM: MUSI, J et MOCUMIE, J JUDGMENT BY: C.J. MUSI, J DELIVERED

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 339/09 MEC FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY Appellant (EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE) and TEMBA MTOKWANA Respondent Neutral citation: 2010) CORAM: MEC v Mtokwana

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA 1 Reportable CASE NO: 499/2000 In the matter between: AUSSENKEHR FARMS (PTY) LTD Appellant and TRIO TRANSPORT CC Respondent Before: Heard: 7 MARCH 2002 Delivered:

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT,PRETORIA) C[...] A[...] W[...] S[...]...Plaintiff. P[...] J[...] S[...]...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT,PRETORIA) C[...] A[...] W[...] S[...]...Plaintiff. P[...] J[...] S[...]... SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley) Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Regional Magistrates Circulate to Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley)

More information

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 26 AUGUST 2009

JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 26 AUGUST 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) Case No: 20900/08 In the matter between: ROSSO SPORT AUTO CC Applicant and VIGLIETTI MOTORS (PTY) LTD Respondent JUDGMENT DELIVERED

More information

Reproduced by Data Dynamics in terms of Government Printers' Copyright Authority No dated 24 September 1993

Reproduced by Data Dynamics in terms of Government Printers' Copyright Authority No dated 24 September 1993 2 No. 417 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 2 AUGUST 17 GENERAL EXPLANATORY NOTE: [ ] Words in bold type in square brackets indicate omissions from existing enactments. Words underlined with a solid line indicate insertions

More information

Government Gazette Staatskoerant

Government Gazette Staatskoerant Please note that most Acts are published in English and another South African official language. Currently we only have capacity to publish the English versions. This means that this document will only

More information

Creditor Particulars To be attached to the Claim Form

Creditor Particulars To be attached to the Claim Form Creditor Particulars To be attached to the Claim Form NAME OF THE ESTATE: PERSONAL / COMPANY PARTICULARS Should any of the details below change, please notify us immediately. NAME (AND SURNAME): POSTAL

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 21738/2014 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (2) REVISED...... DATE SIGNATURE

More information

LEBOGANG GODFREY MOGOPODI

LEBOGANG GODFREY MOGOPODI IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the case between: Case No.: 122/2008 LEBOGANG GODFREY MOGOPODI Applicant and THE MEMBE OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE FREE

More information

Government Gazette Staatskoerant

Government Gazette Staatskoerant Government Gazette Staatskoerant REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIEK VAN SUID AFRIKA Regulation Gazette No. 10847 10177 Regulasiekoerant Vol. 637 13 July Julie 2018 No. 41771 N.B. The Government Printing

More information

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Held at DURBAN on 31 October 2001 CASE NUMBER: LCC 40/01 Before: Gildenhuys AJ Decided on: 7 November 2001 In the interlocutory application of E M MDUNGE AND OTHERS

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION: BLOEMFONTEIN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION: BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between: THE STATE And IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION: BLOEMFONTEIN Review No: 191/2014 PHELLO MXHAKA CORAM: MOCUMIE J et MOENG, AJ JUDGMENT: MOENG, AJ DELIVERED ON:

More information

MALITABA REBECCA PHOKONTSI LIKELELI ELIZABETH SEBOLAI

MALITABA REBECCA PHOKONTSI LIKELELI ELIZABETH SEBOLAI FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the appeal between: MALITABA REBECCA PHOKONTSI LIKELELI ELIZABETH SEBOLAI Case No.: A199/2009 1 st Appellant 2 nd Appellant and KHATSE EVELYN

More information

IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. Nu-Shelf Investments CC Applicant. Strinivasaen Krishna Bangaar First Respondent

IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. Nu-Shelf Investments CC Applicant. Strinivasaen Krishna Bangaar First Respondent IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No: 13703/06 13704/06 In the matter between Nu-Shelf Investments CC Applicant and Strinivasaen Krishna Bangaar First Respondent The

More information

GIDEON JAKOBUS DU PLESSIS APPLICANT WILLEM JACOBUS DU PLESSIS N.O SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGMENT

GIDEON JAKOBUS DU PLESSIS APPLICANT WILLEM JACOBUS DU PLESSIS N.O SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE, PORT ELIZABETH) Case no: 2990/10 Date delivered: 29 October 2010 In the matter between: GIDEON JAKOBUS DU PLESSIS APPLICANT and WILLEM JACOBUS

More information

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NUMBER: 42384/14

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NUMBER: 42384/14 1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF

More information

RAMPAI J RAMPAI J. [1] The matter came before me by way of an exception. The

RAMPAI J RAMPAI J. [1] The matter came before me by way of an exception. The IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (ORANGE FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 1071/2003 In the matter between: HUBRECHT WILLEM STEENBERGEN FIRST PLAINTIFF ZACHARIAS JOHANNES CILLIERS SECOND PLAINTIFF

More information

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT JOHANNESBURG

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT JOHANNESBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 14842/2011 (1) REPORTABLE: Yes (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: Yes. (3) REVISED...... DATE SIGNATURE In the matter between THABO

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between CASE NO. 106/95 SHEILA DEVI SINGH APPELLANT and SANTAM INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED RESPONDENT CORAM: CORBETT CJ, FH GROSSKOPF,

More information

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 1 APRIL 2010 IMPORTANT NOTICE The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for faxed documents not received

GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 1 APRIL 2010 IMPORTANT NOTICE The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for faxed documents not received Regulation Gazette 9252 Regulasiekoerant Vol. 538 Pretoria, 1 April 2010 33068 2 33068 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 1 APRIL 2010 IMPORTANT NOTICE The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for faxed

More information

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA RANDBURG CASE NUMBER: LCC 21R/00 In chambers: DODSON J MAGISTRATE S COURT CASE NUMBER: 6753/98 Decided on: 02 May 2000 In the review proceedings in the case between:

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF

More information

FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN JUDGMENT

FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN JUDGMENT 1 FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, GRAHAMSTOWN JUDGMENT PARTIES: BLUE CRANE ROUTE MUNICIPALITY PLAINTIFF and DARREN OWEN CLAASEN DAVY LOUW ADVOCATE SHAHEED PATEL GEORGE WILLIAM GOOSEN FIRST

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 1386/2007. In the matter between:- OOSTHUYSEN YOLANDE.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 1386/2007. In the matter between:- OOSTHUYSEN YOLANDE. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 1386/2007 In the matter between:- OOSTHUYSEN BEATRIX OOSTHUYSEN YOLANDE First Applicant Second Applicant versus OOSTHUYSEN

More information

[1] The plaintiff instituted action against the defendant for damages to the

[1] The plaintiff instituted action against the defendant for damages to the SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAHIKENG

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAHIKENG IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAHIKENG CASE NO. 2438/2007 In the matter between: SARA JOHANNA BENADE PLAINTIFF and MINISTER OF JUSTICE & CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1 ST DEFENDANT

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the review between:- THE STATE and Review No. : 344/2010 ABEL GEORGE RAHLAU CORAM: RAMPAI, J et KRUGER, J JUDGMENT BY: RAMPAI, J DELIVERED

More information

Proclamations Proklamasies

Proclamations Proklamasies R. 37 Special Investigating Units and Tribunals Act (74/1996): Referral of matters to existing Special Investigating Unit 41271 STAATSKOERANT, 24 NOVEMBER 2017 No. 41271 11 Proclamations Proklamasies PROCLAMATION

More information

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT

as amended by Apportionment of Damages Amendment Act 58 of 1971 (RSA) (RSA GG 3150) came into force on date of publication: 16 June 1971 ACT (SA GG 5689) came into force in South Africa and South West Africa on date of publication: 1 June 1956 (see section 6 of Act) APPLICABILITY TO SOUTH WEST AFRICA: Section 6 originally stated This Act shall

More information

REUBEN ITUMELENG TODI MEC FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT

REUBEN ITUMELENG TODI MEC FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG CASE NO: 751/2005 In the matter between:- REUBEN ITUMELENG TODI Plaintiff and MEC FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT First Defendant OF NORTH WEST RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between: VICTORIA MWEUHANGA Appellant and THE ADMINISTRATOR-GENERAL OF SOUTH WEST AFRICA First Respondent THE STATE PRESIDENT OF

More information

JUDGMENT PHATUDI, J IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH AND SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA) DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2010 CASE NO: 44572/2009.

JUDGMENT PHATUDI, J IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH AND SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA) DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2010 CASE NO: 44572/2009. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH AND SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA) DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2010 CASE NO: 44572/2009 MARLOW PROJECTS CC PLAINTIFF And CAREL SEBASTIAAN JANSER VAN RENSBURG 1 s

More information

In the matter between: -

In the matter between: - IN THE GAUTENG DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, PRETORIA (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES (3) REVISED. In the matter between: - CASE NO.: 2015/80133 JEREMIAH PHEHELLO

More information

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. Kruger v National Director of Public Prosecutions [2018] ZACC 13

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. Kruger v National Director of Public Prosecutions [2018] ZACC 13 CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case CCT 336/17 ARRIE WILLEM KRUGER Applicant and NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Respondent Neutral citation: Kruger v National Director

More information

IN THE TRIBUNAL OF THE PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG)

IN THE TRIBUNAL OF THE PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG) IN THE TRIBUNAL OF THE PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR (HELD IN JOHANNESBURG) CASE NO: PFA/WE/24355/2008/SM In the complaint between: CONSOL LTD t/a CONSOL GLASS Complainant and MOMENTUM FUNDSATWORK UMBRELLA

More information

Vivier JA, Farlam JA, Cameron JA, Conradie JA and Shongwe AJA

Vivier JA, Farlam JA, Cameron JA, Conradie JA and Shongwe AJA BEZUIDENHOUT v ROAD ACCIDENT FUND 2003 (6) SA 61 (SCA) Citation Case No 355/2002 Court Judge 2003 (6) SA 61 (SCA) Supreme Court of Appeal Heard May 13, 2003 Judgment June 2, 2003 Counsel Annotations 2003

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT) JUDGMENT. The defendant applies to court for an order in terms of which the plaintiff is

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT) JUDGMENT. The defendant applies to court for an order in terms of which the plaintiff is I IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT) Case number: 56513/2008 Date: 31 March 2011 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1} REPORTABLE: Y S?NO (2} OF INTEREST TO OTHERS jy^esi^xk/no

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORA SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

2 No Act No.6, 2006 SECTIONAL TITLES AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 25 JULY 2006 GENERAL EXPLANATORY NOTE: Words in bold type in squar

2 No Act No.6, 2006 SECTIONAL TITLES AMENDMENT ACT, 2006 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 25 JULY 2006 GENERAL EXPLANATORY NOTE: Words in bold type in squar Vol. 493 Cape Town, 25 July Kaapstad, Julie 2006 THE PRESIDENCY DIE PRESIDENSIE No. 747 25 July 2006 No. 747 25 Julie 2006 It is hereby notified that the President has Hierby word bekend gemaak dat die

More information

Coram: HOEXTER, NESTADT et MILNE JJA, FRIEDMAN et GOLDSTONE AJJA.

Coram: HOEXTER, NESTADT et MILNE JJA, FRIEDMAN et GOLDSTONE AJJA. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) CASE NUMBER 524/88 LOWER COURTNUMBER12272/86 In the matter between: STANDARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED APPELLANT and VERDUN ESTATES (PROPRIETARY)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA WESTRN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN HENCETRADE 15 (PTY) LTD TUDOR HOTEL BRASSERIE & BAR (PTY) LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA WESTRN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN HENCETRADE 15 (PTY) LTD TUDOR HOTEL BRASSERIE & BAR (PTY) LTD IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA WESTRN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN Case number: 15275/2015 In the matter between: HENCETRADE 15 (PTY) LTD Applicant And TUDOR HOTEL BRASSERIE & BAR (PTY) LTD Respondent JUDGMENT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN In the matter between IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CA248/2017 DATE HEARD: 03/12/2018 DATE DELIVERED: 05/02/2019 WERNER DE JAGER N.O. SEAN MARIO JOHNSON

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. CA 107/2017 APPEAL JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. CA 107/2017 APPEAL JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. CA 107/2017 In the matter between: NATASHA GOLIATH Appellant and THE MINISTER OF POLICE Respondent APPEAL JUDGMENT Bloem J

More information

.(.~\.?:.~Jj... ~.~...

.(.~\.?:.~Jj... ~.~... CASE N0:58939/2016 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABU! (1) REPORTABLE: )rl$/no (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER$ JUDGES: v}l'!/'no 11..(.~\.?:.~Jj... ~.~.... (3) REVISfO ~ V DATE ltna~ In the matter between: ABSA

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION) JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION) JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION) In the matter between : CASE NO. 15732/07 HEPBURN, JOHN DONALD APPLICANT Applicant And MILLER, JACQUELINE SIMONE RESPONDENT VAN

More information