SemantisAI Reportable Judgments

This privacy policy is issued by and on behalf of SemantisAI (Pty) Ltd (“Semantis.AI”)

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Restraint of trade — Enforcement of restraint of trade agreement — Applicant seeking interim interdict against first respondent for breaching restraint by soliciting clients after resignation — First respondent employed by applicant, later joined competitor — Applicant established protectable interest in client relationships — First respondent's actions constituted solicitation of clients in breach of restraint — Second respondent complicit in first respondent's unlawful conduct — Interim interdict granted for 12 months, restraining both respondents from soliciting applicant's clients.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 65/100 Amicus Curiae — Admission of amici curiae — Application for admission by experts in animal law to provide submissions on constitutional issues regarding the captivity of elephants — Main application seeks to declare the captivity unconstitutional — Respondents oppose admission on grounds of lack of constitutional issue and delay — Court finds that the amici have satisfied the requirements of rule 16A and that their expertise will assist the court — Admission granted and delay condoned.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Civil Procedure — Uniform Rule 21 — Request for further particulars — Application to compel — Plaintiff sought further particulars from the Second Defendant regarding its plea of denial in a construction dispute — The Second Defendant's responses deemed insufficient for trial preparation — Court ordered the Second Defendant to provide adequate particulars within ten days, with potential consequences for non-compliance — Costs of the application deferred until the conclusion of the trial.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Execution — Superior Courts Act — Interpretation of s 17(2)(f) — Appellant sought reconsideration of refusal of leave to appeal against convictions and sentences for possession of illegal firearms and drugs — President of the Supreme Court of Appeal referred the matter for reconsideration, asserting exceptional circumstances existed — Legal issue centered on whether the determination of exceptional circumstances is within the President's discretion or the Court's — Court held that the President has the exclusive power to determine exceptional circumstances, and the previous interpretation in Bidvest was incorrect — Appellant's convictions on counts 1-3 were overturned, while convictions on counts 4-8 were upheld, with sentences on counts 4, 6, and 7 reduced to eight years’ imprisonment, all to run concurrently.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Exceptions — Pleadings — Validity of particulars of claim — Defendant raised exceptions in three matters concerning claims for payment for services rendered under service agreements — Plaintiffs alleged that services were provided at the defendant's instance, but defendant contended that particulars lacked necessary averments to establish a cause of action — Court held that the particulars of claim disclosed a cause of action and were not vague or embarrassing, dismissing the exceptions in all three cases.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Disciplinary Proceedings — Review of school disciplinary actions — Applicants, parents of two learners, challenged the validity of disciplinary proceedings and sanctions imposed for vaping incidents — The school’s governing body acted ultra vires by enforcing expulsion without referral to the Head of Department, thus rendering the August 2024 proceedings invalid — The October 2024 proceedings constituted an impermissible rehearing of the same incident, lacking lawful authority — Both sets of proceedings and sanctions were declared invalid and set aside without remittal, with costs awarded to the applicants on scale C.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Delict — Municipal liability — Claim for damages arising from drowning of minor child in uncovered drain — Appellants alleged municipality's negligence in failing to maintain public infrastructure — Trial court found municipality liable; full court overturned this finding, citing lack of proof of wrongfulness and causation — Appeal court reinstated trial court's decision, finding that municipality had a legal duty to maintain the drain, and its failure to do so was wrongful and negligent, directly causing the child's death.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 52/100 Business Rescue — Appointment of business rescue practitioner — Dispute over locus standi — Mr. Tayob sought to establish himself as a joint business rescue practitioner for the NTI companies, NWS, and ABS, following a board resolution appointing him in April 2025. However, Mr. Samons was the duly appointed practitioner, and the court found that Mr. Tayob's appointment was invalid as it did not comply with the statutory requirements of the Companies Act. The court held that Mr. Tayob lacked locus standi to act as a business rescue practitioner, leading to the dismissal of his application and an order for costs against him.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Damages — Loss of earnings and earning capacity — Plaintiff, a 34-year-old unemployed male, sustained severe brain injuries in a motor vehicle accident while a pedestrian, rendering him unemployable — Merits settled on a 60%-40% basis in favor of the plaintiff, with general damages agreed upon — Dispute centered on the plaintiff's claim for past and future loss of earnings — Court allowed expert evidence to be presented via affidavit due to lack of opposition from the defendant — Expert testimony indicated that the plaintiff had progressed to a stable, full-time position prior to the accident, with potential for future earnings growth — Court accepted the plaintiff's expert's assessment of pre-morbid earnings potential as more probable than that of the defendant's expert — Awarded damages totaling R2 629 204,68, after applying a 40% apportionment for contributory negligence.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Insolvency — Provisional sequestration — Application for provisional sequestration of respondent's estate due to acts of insolvency — Respondent failed to satisfy judgment debt and indicated lack of disposable assets — Court found that respondent committed acts of insolvency as per sections 8(b) and 8(g) of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936 — Provisional sequestration order granted, with a return date for final sequestration hearing set.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 63/100

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Local Government — Appointment of municipal manager — Competency requirements — Appellant appointed as municipal manager despite receiving a "basic" competency rating, while respondent received a "competent" rating — Respondent challenged the legality of the appointment, arguing it contravened the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000 and its Regulations, which require a minimum "competent" rating for appointment — High Court upheld the challenge, ruling that the appointment was null and void as the appellant did not meet the prescribed competency requirements — Appeal dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 55/100 Customs and Excise — Diesel refunds — Rebate Item 670.04 — Appellant claimed diesel refunds for fuel used by contractors — Dispute over whether contracts were on a wet or dry basis — High Court found contracts were on a wet basis, disqualifying refunds — Appellant's failure to maintain proper logbooks as required by legislation further disqualified claims — Constitutional challenge to sections of the Act dismissed for lack of proper pleading — Appeal dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Interdict — Suspension of statutory powers — Applicants sought interdict to suspend sectoral numerical targets set by the Minister of Employment and Labour — Court held that the exercise of statutory power had already occurred, rendering interdict unsuitable — Principle of separation of powers upheld, with the court lacking authority to suspend actions of another government arm — Irreparable harm not established, and judicial review deemed the appropriate remedy — Application dismissed with each party bearing its own costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Labour Law — Unfair Dismissal — Review of arbitration award — Dismissal of employees for misconduct during protected strike — Arbitrator's reliance on common purpose doctrine — Reviewable irregularity found in the Arbitrator's reasoning and admission of hearsay evidence — Dismissal deemed substantively and procedurally unfair for certain employees, while others confirmed as fairly dismissed. Following the dismissal of 50 employees, members of the Southern African Clothing and Textile Workers Union, a dispute was referred to the CCMA, where an Arbitrator found all employees guilty of misconduct related to a protected strike. The Union sought to review the arbitration award, arguing that the Arbitrator committed gross irregularities in his findings, particularly regarding the application of the common purpose doctrine and the admission of hearsay evidence. The Labour Court held that the Arbitrator's conclusions were not those a reasonable decision-maker could reach, leading to the determination that the dismissals of certain employees were both substantively and procedurally unfair, while the dismissals of others were confirmed as fair.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Labour Law — Unfair Dismissal — Review of Arbitration Award — The Southern African Clothing and Textile Workers Union challenged the dismissal of 50 employees, asserting unfair dismissal following a protected strike that involved acts of violence. The CCMA Arbitrator found all employees guilty based on common purpose, leading to their dismissal. The Union sought to review the award, arguing that the Arbitrator committed gross irregularities, particularly in the application of the common purpose doctrine and the admission of hearsay evidence. The Labour Court found that the Arbitrator misconstrued the evidence and the law, leading to a conclusion that no reasonable decision-maker could have reached. The Court ruled that the dismissals of 19 employees were substantively and procedurally unfair, ordering their reinstatement with back-pay, while confirming the fairness of dismissals for others involved in violent conduct.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Contract — Termination — Unilateral termination of service agreement — Gateway Airports Authority (SOC) Ltd attempted to terminate its contract with Mekan Engineering Services (Pty) Ltd, claiming irregularity in the award process — Mekan contended that Gateway's termination was a repudiation of the agreement — Court held that Gateway's reliance on the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) for self-review was invalid, as an organ of state cannot review its own decision under PAJA — Review application dismissed, and Gateway ordered to pay outstanding invoices and damages to Mekan.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 52/100 Eviction — Unlawful occupation — Prevention of Illegal Eviction from Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, No. 19 of 1998 — Applicants, as trustees of the Qaasim Abduraouf Trust, sought eviction of Respondents from property unlawfully occupied since 2014 — Respondents claimed rights based on a void Deed of Sale and alleged improvements made to the property — Court held that the Deed of Sale was null and void due to lack of executorship and that Respondents had no legal right to occupy the property — Eviction order granted as just and equitable, with Respondents required to vacate by a specified date.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 **Case Summary: South African Human Rights Commission and Dante Van Wyk v. Julius Sello Malema and the Economic Freedom Fighters** In the consolidated applications before the Equality Court, the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and complainant Dante Van Wyk sought declarations that statements made by Julius Malema, the leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), constituted hate speech and unfair discrimination based on race and belief, as well as harassment under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The statements in question were made during a speech on October 16, 2022, at a provincial assembly of the EFF, and were alleged to have incited threats against Van Wyk. The court proceedings included oral evidence from both parties, with the complainants presenting a forensic linguist's analysis of Malema's speech, while the respondents called a political scientist to interpret the context of the statements. The background of the case involved protests by the EFF against a perceived racially exclusive event at Brackenfell High School, which escalated into confrontations between EFF members and local residents. The court's focus was on the merits of the complaints, with the determination of relief to be addressed at a later stage. The judgment reflects ongoing tensions in South Africa regarding race, political expression, and the boundaries of free speech.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 40/100 In the case of Brett Cecil Williams v Andante Villas Body Corporate and Others, the High Court of South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal Division, delivered a judgment on 27 August 2025, concerning an urgent application brought by the applicant, Brett Cecil Williams, who is an owner within the Andante Villas body corporate. The application was initially set for hearing on 25 June 2025 but was adjourned to the opposed roll for 27 August 2025. Upon review, Judge Mossop found that the urgent application did not meet the necessary criteria for urgency and was essentially a compilation of various other applications involving the same parties, which had not been properly enrolled for consideration. The court struck the urgent application off the roll for lack of urgency and ordered the applicant to pay the respondents' costs on an attorney and client scale. The judgment highlighted the applicant's failure to comply with the court's Practice Directives, particularly regarding the timely submission of application papers, which complicated the judge's ability to prepare for the hearing. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural rules to ensure the efficient administration of justice.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Interim Relief — Preservation of estate assets — Applicants sought urgent interim relief to protect the estate of the late Mr. Aubrey Mei pending executor appointment — Allegations of asset dissipation by respondents, including unauthorized collection of rental income and use of estate vehicles — Court found applicants established a prima facie right to preservation of assets and demonstrated reasonable apprehension of irreparable harm — Balance of convenience favored granting interim relief to prevent potential asset dissipation — Rule nisi issued to restrain respondents from dissipating estate assets and requiring them to account for rental income.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Civil Procedure — Interlocutory application — Request for further particulars — Applicants sought to strike out respondent's claim based on alleged non-compliance with a request for further particulars — Respondent's claim arose from failure to pay remuneration and benefits — Applicants' defence had been struck out prior to the request, leaving them without a case to prepare for trial — Court held that the request for particulars was a nullity as it did not comply with Rule 21(2) of the Uniform Rules of Court — Application dismissed with costs on a punitive scale against the applicants.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 45/100 In the case of Sello v South African Pharmacy Council, the High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria) dismissed the applicants' request to review and set aside the decision of the South African Pharmacy Council (the respondent) to initiate disciplinary proceedings against them. The applicants, pharmacists Abram Ditonkana Sello and Potego Sello, contended that the disciplinary process was irregular and violated their right to procedural fairness. They argued that they were not given an opportunity to respond to the complaints or the findings of the inspections conducted at their pharmacy, Lakefield Pharmacy, which had initially received an A grading but was later downgraded to a C grade following a disciplinary inspection. The court found that the applicants had not established sufficient grounds for the review application, noting that the disciplinary inquiry had not yet concluded and no findings had been made against them. The court emphasized that the applicants' claims regarding procedural unfairness were premature, as they had not yet faced any formal charges or outcomes from the ongoing inquiry. Consequently, the application was dismissed, and the applicants were ordered to pay the respondent's costs, including those for engaging two counsel, one of whom was a senior counsel.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 55/100 Appeal — Leave to appeal — Correction of patent error — City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality sought leave to appeal against judgments correcting a date in a prior order regarding prescription of municipal debts — The original judgment declared debts due before May 2018 as prescribed, while the reasoning indicated a cut-off date of May 2020 — The court revised the order to correct the date to May 2020, finding it a patent error — The City contended that the court acted functus officio and that the correction was unfair — The court held that the correction aligned the order with the judgment's reasoning, did not revisit the merits, and was permissible under Rule 42(1)(b) — Leave to appeal denied as no reasonable prospects of success were established.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Intestate Succession — Declaration of parenthood — Application by executrix of deceased's estate to declare father unworthy to inherit — Father absent from child's life for 29 years, providing minimal support — Court declines to follow precedent in Wilsnach, emphasizing the distinction between parental rights under the Children’s Act and inheritance rights under the Intestate Succession Act — Father declared unworthy to inherit from the estate based on extreme neglect and abandonment.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Winding-up — Provisional winding-up — Application for winding-up of Banxso (Pty) Ltd on grounds of inability to pay debts and allegations of fraudulent conduct — Applicant, a pensioner, lost substantial investment due to alleged illegal business practices of Banxso — Court considers the condictio ob turpem vel iniustam and the legitimacy of the business model — Banxso's opposition based on claims of solvency and abuse of process — Court finds prima facie evidence of illegal operations and fraudulent misrepresentation, leading to the conclusion that the winding-up application is justified — Provisional winding-up order granted.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 In the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape Division, the case of Desmond Matthew De Wet v. Mark George Barron and Others (Case No: 796/2024) addressed the issue of whether the applicant's claim for specific performance regarding the transfer of property had prescribed under the Prescription Act 68 of 1969. The applicant sought to compel the first respondent to register a transfer of an undivided share in a property, which was the subject of a deed of sale dated July 25, 2014. The court focused solely on the legal question of prescription, as both parties agreed that the relevant facts were common cause and could be resolved without oral testimony. The court found that the applicant's claim had indeed prescribed, as the conditions for prescription under the relevant sections of the Prescription Act were met. The applicant had advanced R50,000 to the first respondent to prevent the sale of the property in execution, which was part of the contractual obligations outlined in the deed of sale. However, the court concluded that the applicant's claim for specific performance was unenforceable due to the lapse of time, leading to the dismissal of the application with costs. The judgment underscores the importance of timely action in enforcing contractual rights and the implications of prescription in property transactions.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Lease — Right of first refusal — Lessee's application for interim interdict to prevent transfer of property — Lessee contending that right of first refusal not lapsed — Lessor arguing that right lapsed due to failure to exercise within three months of property being marketed — Court held that lessee established prima facie right to enforce option, as no proper notice of sale was given to lessee, and balance of convenience favoured lessee's continued farming activities — Interim interdict granted pending final determination of lessee's rights.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Administrative Law — Review of administrative action — Transfer of military officer — Lt. Col. Sibiya challenged his transfer from the Military Academy, Saldanha to Legatso, claiming it was unlawful and unconstitutional due to lack of consultation and failure to meet post requirements — The Minister argued that internal remedies were not exhausted and that the transfer was justified based on qualifications — Court found that all internal remedies were exhausted, the transfer was procedurally unfair, and the requirement for an LLM degree was irrational — Transfer reviewed and set aside, reinstating Lt. Col. Sibiya to his previous position with costs awarded against the respondents.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Collective Agreements — Lawfulness — Retirement Fund Collective Agreement — The validity of the Retirement Fund Collective Agreement (CA) was challenged by various retirement funds on the grounds that it unlawfully regulated pension funds and imposed accreditation requirements that fettered the independence of fund trustees. The CA was concluded by the South African Local Government Association and two trade unions, aiming to standardize retirement fund arrangements across the local government sector. The high court found the CA to be unlawful and set it aside, ruling that it exceeded the parties' authority and violated the provisions of the Pension Funds Act. The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the high court's decision, confirming that the CA was invalid due to its illegality and failure to comply with statutory requirements.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 68/100 Criminal Law — Sentencing — Minimum sentence for murder — Accused convicted of murder and attempting to defeat justice — Accused no 1 sentenced to 24 years imprisonment for murder and 3 years for attempting to defeat justice, to run concurrently — Court found substantial and compelling circumstances justifying deviation from life imprisonment — Accused no 2 sentenced to 3 years imprisonment, wholly suspended for 5 years. Accused no 1, Eldridge Africa, was convicted of murder by common purpose and attempting to defeat justice, having transported and disposed of the victim's body. Accused no 2, Duranth Prince, was convicted of the same charge of attempting to defeat justice but had no prior convictions and was found to have acted under duress. The legal issue concerned whether substantial and compelling circumstances existed to deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence of life imprisonment for murder. The court held that while the gravity of the offences warranted a lengthy sentence, the personal circumstances of accused no 1, including his intoxication at the time of the crime and lengthy pre-trial incarceration, constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justifying a lesser sentence. Accused no 2's sentence was suspended due to his lack of prior convictions and mitigating factors.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 65/100 Criminal law — Appeal against conviction — Murder — Identity of assailant — Eyewitness testimony — Appellant convicted of murder based on identification by two eyewitnesses, both of whom had prior knowledge of the appellant — Appellant's appeal contended that the State failed to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt — Court found that the corroborated evidence of the eyewitnesses was sufficient to establish the appellant as the shooter, dismissing the appeal.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 In the case of Mayisela and Others v MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, the High Court of Mpumalanga was tasked with reviewing three decisions made by the MEC under section 106 of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000. The Applicants, led by Mr. Humphrey Sizwe Mayisela, challenged the MEC's appointment of Analytical Forensic Investigation Services (AFIS) to investigate allegations of malpractice, fraud, and corruption within the Emalahleni Local Municipality. The Applicants contended that the MEC acted ultra vires, lacking the necessary jurisdictional facts to invoke section 106, and failed to comply with procedural fairness, including the right to be heard. The MEC and AFIS opposed the review, arguing that Mr. Mayisela lacked locus standi, as the investigation was aimed at the Municipality rather than individuals. They claimed that the report generated by AFIS was a preliminary step and did not constitute administrative action subject to review under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. The court examined the procedural history, including the MEC's prior notice to the Municipality and the subsequent report submitted in response, ultimately considering whether the MEC's actions were rationally connected to the purpose of the legislation and whether the Applicants' rights were adequately protected throughout the process. The judgment highlights the balance between municipal oversight and individual rights within the framework of local governance.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 **Case Summary: Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Limited v Gauteng Gambling Board (Case No. 41790/2019)** In this review application, Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Limited (Phumelela) sought to challenge a decision made by the Gauteng Gambling Board (the Board) which found it guilty of violating Condition 10 of its race meeting license. The Board imposed a fine of R5 million, half of which was suspended for two years. Phumelela, which operated as a totalizator for horseracing in Gauteng, contended that the Board's decision was unjust and sought to have it reviewed and set aside under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA). The case took a turn when Phumelela entered business rescue and transferred its operations to another entity, 4Racing (Pty) Ltd, leading to a narrowing of the relief sought to a request for the repayment of the fine. The court noted that the circumstances surrounding the case were unusual, particularly given Phumelela's change in operational status and the agreement between the parties that remitting the matter back to the Board would not be a suitable remedy. The judgment also highlighted the historical context of Condition 10, which required Phumelela to provide visual broadcasts for betting purposes on a cost-recovery basis. The Board's disciplinary proceedings were initiated following complaints from the Gauteng Off-Course Bookmakers' Association regarding Phumelela's compliance with this condition. Ultimately, the court's decision would hinge on the interpretation of the license conditions and the procedural fairness of the Board's actions.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 45/100 In the High Court of South Africa, Limpopo Division, the case of Mabutlanyane Nemia Magolego N.O and others v Magolego Kgola Klaas and others (Case No: 11014/2022) involved an application for leave to appeal a previous judgment that dismissed the applicants' Rule 30 applications aimed at setting aside Rule 7(1) notices. The applicants, who are trustees of the Ditamaga Trust, sought to challenge the validity of these notices, arguing that they were irregular and filed late without proper condonation. However, the court found that the notices were valid and that the brief delay in filing did not prejudice the respondents, thus justifying the condonation. The court emphasized that the applicants failed to demonstrate proper authorization to litigate on behalf of the trust, as their authority was fundamentally disputed. The judgment highlighted the importance of accountability and transparency from trustees to the beneficiaries of the trust, stating that allowing the appeal would only serve to delay the resolution of substantive issues. Ultimately, the court concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of success for the appeal, nor any compelling reason to grant it, as the matter did not raise novel legal principles but rather involved trustees attempting to evade their fiduciary duties through procedural technicalities.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 In the case of Education and Training Unit NPC v Edward Mwanandimai, the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, addressed an application for the final sequestration of the respondent's estate based on multiple acts of insolvency as defined in the Insolvency Act of 1936. The applicant, Education and Training Unit NPC (ETU), alleged that the respondent, who was previously employed as an accountant, misappropriated over R17 million during his tenure. The fraudulent activities included diverting payments meant for legitimate creditors to his own accounts, creating fictitious employee records, and manipulating payroll data to gain unauthorized benefits. Following an internal investigation, the respondent acknowledged his debt to ETU, signing an Acknowledgment of Debt (AOD) that confirmed his liability of R6,797,715.60. The court considered the evidence of insolvency, including the respondent's attempts to negotiate reduced payment terms with ETU, which indicated an inability to meet his debt obligations. The applicant's reliance on sections 8(c), 8(e), and 8(g) of the Insolvency Act was pivotal in establishing the grounds for sequestration. The court had previously granted a provisional sequestration order, and upon reviewing the evidence and the respondent's financial conduct, it was determined that the final sequestration order was warranted. The judgment underscores the legal mechanisms available to creditors in cases of fraud and insolvency, emphasizing the importance of accountability in financial dealings.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Interlocutory Application — Condonation — Late filing of answering affidavit — Respondents’ application for condonation granted despite delay — Court satisfied that interests of justice warrant opportunity for Respondents to ventilate their case — Main application under Rule 30A(2) dismissed as Respondents complied with prior court order — Costs awarded against Applicant.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Unlawful Arrest — Vicarious liability — Claim for damages arising from unlawful arrest, search, and detention — Plaintiff, a candidate attorney, alleged he was unlawfully arrested and searched by SAPS members without reasonable suspicion — Defendant denied the occurrence of arrest, asserting the plaintiff was involved in drug dealing — Court found that the plaintiff was indeed arrested and searched unlawfully, with no reasonable grounds for suspicion — Damages awarded for the infringement of the plaintiff's rights, with compensation set at R120,000.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 68/100 Administrative Law — Tender process — Review of decision not to award tender — Applicant recommended as highest scorer by Bid Evaluation Committee — Bid Adjudication Committee's decision not to award based on alleged absence of budget confirmation and lack of cost-benefit analysis — Court finds reliance on these grounds constituted irrelevant considerations and failure to act fairly — Decision reviewed and set aside, matter remitted for reconsideration in accordance with legal requirements.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Custody — Best interests of the child — Appeal against interim guardianship order — Appellants, maternal grandparents, sought guardianship of minor children following the death of their mother — Respondent, biological father, claimed parental rights — Court a quo confirmed interim order in favor of Respondent, rejecting evidence from a private social worker — Appellants contended that the court failed to consider the best interests of the children and disregarded relevant evidence — Appeal upheld; court found that the lower court did not adequately fulfill its duty as upper guardian and failed to investigate the children's best interests — Matter referred back for further investigation and consideration of the children's welfare.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 79/100 Road Accident Fund — Claim for damages — Appellant injured in motor vehicle accident while a passenger — Appellant's claim for damages dismissed on quantum by court a quo, finding injuries healed and no evidence of employment incapacity — Appellant appeals against dismissal of quantum claim — Court finds that the court a quo misdirected itself by not considering all expert reports collectively, leading to an erroneous conclusion regarding the appellant's employability and future earnings — Appeal upheld; appellant awarded R1 762 207.70 for past and future loss of earnings, and claim for general damages postponed sine die.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Contract — Specific performance — Simulated agreement — Applicant sought specific performance of a contract for the transfer of property following a discrepancy in the original sale agreement — The court examined whether the second agreement was a simulation or a valid contract — The first respondent contended that the second agreement was a sham intended to mislead tax authorities — The court held that the second agreement was not a simulation, as it reflected the true intention of the parties to transfer the unregistered portion of the property, and granted the applicant's request for specific performance.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Delict — Personal injury — Claim for damages arising from assault on train — Plaintiff attacked and pushed from train, resulting in severe injuries including amputation — Defendant (Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa) settled liability, agreeing to pay 50% of proven damages — Court adjudicated on quantum of damages, including past and future medical expenses and loss of earnings — Expert evidence indicated plaintiff unemployable post-incident, with significant loss of earnings — Court awarded damages for loss of earnings and future medical expenses, totaling R5,475,318, with costs on Scale B.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 55/100 Criminal Law — Premeditated murder — Plea of guilty — Section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 — Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment confirmed. Appellant pleaded guilty to murder but contested the premeditated nature of the crime, asserting it was impulsive. The State presented evidence of premeditation, including the nature of the injuries inflicted and the circumstances leading to the killing. The trial court found sufficient evidence of premeditation, leading to a life sentence. Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of raping his biological daughter, aged under 16 — Trial court imposed 15 years’ imprisonment, finding substantial and compelling circumstances — Appellant contended that the evidence of the complainant, a single witness, was unreliable and did not support a conviction for rape — Court found that the trial court misdirected itself in assessing the evidence, particularly regarding the credibility of the complainant and the absence of corroborative evidence — Appeal upheld, conviction and sentence set aside, and appellant released from incarceration.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 65/100 In this case, the Applicant sought the winding-up of the First Respondent, a housing association, on the grounds of insolvency and the inability to pay its debts. The court found that the Applicant had established its status as a creditor and that the First Respondent was both factually and commercially insolvent. The evidence indicated a long history of financial mismanagement, infighting among the directors, and failure to collect rental payments, which had led to the First Respondent's increasing indebtedness. The court determined that it was just and equitable to grant the winding-up order to prevent further financial deterioration. The court dismissed the Respondent's argument that winding up would lead to homelessness for the occupants of Argyle Court, noting that their rights would be protected under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act. The court emphasized that the Applicant was entitled to seek the winding-up as a matter of justice, given the circumstances. Consequently, the application for winding up was granted, with costs to be borne in the winding-up proceedings, while the joinder application was dismissed, and each party was ordered to pay its own costs related to that application.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Family Law — Child custody — Relocation of minor children — Application by mother for interdict against father relocating children pending finalisation of custody arrangements — Father opposing application and seeking primary residence — Court finds relocation not in best interests of children due to trauma and instability — Primary residence awarded to father with structured contact for mother, including therapeutic interventions and educational requirements for children.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 75/100 In the case of Letlhogonolo Noge-Tungamirai v Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies, the Applicant, a former non-executive board member of SA Postbank SOC Limited, sought to review and set aside the Minister's decision to remove her from the board. The Applicant argued that the Minister's decision was subject to administrative-law scrutiny under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) and that it violated the Companies Act and the shareholders' compact agreement. She sought reinstatement, a public apology, and costs. The Respondents contended that the Minister acted as a shareholder, rendering the decision non-reviewable under PAJA. The court addressed preliminary issues regarding the Applicant's procedural compliance, noting that she did not follow the required Uniform Rule 53 for review applications, which necessitates filing a record of the decision being challenged. The court ruled that the Applicant's supplementary affidavit, which aimed to expand her review grounds, was impermissible without prior leave from the court. Consequently, the court did not grant the Applicant leave to supplement her papers and considered only the affidavits filed in accordance with the rules. The Respondents' late filing of their answering affidavit was also addressed, with the court noting that the delay was not opposed and was adequately explained.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 65/100 Labour Law — Review of arbitration award — Applicant sought to review and set aside an arbitration award finding his dismissal fair — The Commissioner concluded that the Applicant engaged in dishonest conduct by charging upfront fees on reinvested funds that were not new investments, violating the Bank's policies — Review application dismissed as the Applicant failed to meet the stringent threshold for interference with the award.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Divorce — Interim relief — Rule 43 application — Applicant seeking maintenance and legal fees — Requirement for full and frank disclosure of financial position — Applicant failed to disclose significant investment and contributions from respondent — Court unable to determine need for maintenance or legal costs — Application struck off the roll.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Company law — Oppressive conduct — Section 163 of Companies Act 71 of 2008 — Applicants, trustees of the Elbert de Wit Familie Trust, sought relief against the First and Second Respondents, directors of Gasvoorsieners Boland (Edms) Bpk, for declaring dividends solely to the First Respondent and advancing loans to the Maryke Smit Family Trust without the Applicants' consent — Conduct alleged to be oppressive and unfairly prejudicial to the interests of the Applicants as co-equal shareholders — Jurisdictional facts of section 163(1)(c) established — Final relief granted under section 163(2)(f), (h), and (j) including replacement of the Second Respondent as director, setting aside of loan agreements, and compensation orders.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 68/100 Adjudication — Enforcement of adjudicator's determination — Pro-Khaya Construction CC sought enforcement of an adjudicator's determination requiring the City of Cape Town to pay R8 095 536.22 — City resisted enforcement, claiming adjudicator lacked jurisdiction and sought review of the determination — Court held that the adjudicator had jurisdiction, the determination was valid and enforceable, and the City failed to comply with the adjudication process — Enforcement of the determination granted, and counter-application for review dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 **Case Summary: The State v. Sinethemba Makaleni & Others (CC08/2020)** In the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape Division, the accused, Sinethemba Makaleni, Lonwabo Cosa, and Siyanda Ndzendze, were found guilty of multiple serious offenses, including the murder of David Mbazwana and the attempted murder of Yandisa Sitishi, both occurring on May 19, 2019. The court determined that the murder was premeditated and committed in furtherance of a common purpose, invoking the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which allows for a minimum sentence of life imprisonment. Additionally, the accused were convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, while one accused, Anga Anganda Mabejane, was acquitted of all charges. The judgment was based on substantial evidence, including witness testimonies that detailed the events leading to the shooting at the Whitehouse tavern. The court noted the emotional distress experienced by witnesses during the proceedings, which highlighted the serious nature of the case and the impact of violent crime on the community. The court's findings reflect a commitment to addressing violent crime through stringent legal measures, particularly in cases involving firearms and premeditated acts of violence.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 In the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, the case of T[...] S[...] v The Road Accident Fund (Case No. 23172/18) was adjudicated on 15 August 2025, focusing on the claims for general damages and loss of earnings following a serious motor vehicle accident involving a minor pedestrian. The Plaintiff, represented by Advocate Ntokozo Mjiako, sought compensation for the extensive injuries sustained by the five-year-old Patient, who suffered severe traumatic brain injuries and other significant bodily harm as a result of the accident on 11 January 2016. The Defendant conceded liability for the injuries and offered to pay 109% of the proven general damages, which the Plaintiff rejected as insufficient by R3 million. The court ultimately granted an order for general damages as per the draft order presented, without providing immediate reasons. The Defendant later requested the court to furnish reasons for the order, which were subsequently provided. The judgment highlighted the serious nature of the Patient's injuries, including multiple contusions, fractures, and complications requiring extensive medical treatment and rehabilitation. The court's decision to award general damages was based on the severity of the injuries and their long-term implications for the Patient's quality of life. The matter of loss of earnings was addressed separately in a subsequent order, further emphasizing the ongoing legal proceedings related to the Patient's claims against the Road Accident Fund.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 73/100 In the case of Jila v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, the applicant, Frans Mabothe Mat Jila, a Flight Sergeant in the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), sought a review of the decision not to appoint him as a Lieutenant following his completion of an officers' forming course. Jila had been promoted to Candidate Officer after successfully completing the course but was later informed that he would not be appointed due to prior convictions, which he contended had been cleared. He lodged a grievance regarding this decision, which was ultimately dismissed by the South African Air Force Grievance Committee, leading him to escalate the matter further within the Department of Defence. The court considered the respondents' late submission of their answering affidavit and granted condonation for the delay, despite the lack of a comprehensive explanation. The respondents defended their decision by citing provisions of the Defence Act, which stipulate the qualifications necessary for a permanent commission, including the requirement of a clean criminal record. The court's judgment focused on the procedural aspects of the grievance process and the validity of the respondents' decision, ultimately addressing the applicant's request for reinstatement as a Candidate Officer with full retrospective benefits.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Municipal Law — Property Rates — Unlawful levying of rates based on alleged illegal use of property — The City issued a notice to Ms. Lampe claiming her gymnasium operated without consent, leading to increased property rates. Ms. Lampe contended she had valid consent from the Randburg Town Council since 1984. The City’s claim was based on a lack of specific planning consent, which the court found to be unfounded as the original business licence constituted sufficient consent. The court declared the City’s conduct in levying enhanced rates unlawful and ordered the reversal of charges levied since July 2019.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Legal Practice — Disciplinary proceedings — Removal from roll of legal practitioners — Applicant sought removal of First Respondent's name from the roll due to serious misconduct, including misappropriation of trust funds and failure to pay annual fees — First Respondent admitted to some transgressions but claimed he remained a fit and proper person to practice — Court found First Respondent's conduct unprofessional and dishonourable, failing to maintain the required standards of honesty and integrity — Court held that First Respondent was not a fit and proper person to practice and ordered his removal from the roll of legal practitioners.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100\n\nExecution — Access to premises — Urgent application for access to business premises to search for documents and data — Applicant contending entitlement under binder agreement — Respondent arguing agai...

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Broadcasting — Class Broadcasting Service Licence — Renewal — Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) refusing to accept late renewal application — Whether ICASA has statutory power to condone late submissions — Open Heaven Community Radio's licence originally valid for five years, amended regulations extending validity to seven years — High Court ruling that ICASA has power to condone late applications and remitting matter back to ICASA for reconsideration — Appeal by ICASA dismissed; cross-appeal by Open Heaven upheld, confirming seven-year validity of licence from effective date.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Legal Practice — Suspension of attorney — Appeal against suspension pending investigation by Legal Practice Council — Attorney's conduct not constituting misrepresentation or breach of professional conduct — Lack of clarity in correspondence with third party not amounting to actionable misconduct — Appeal upheld with costs on attorney and own client scale. The first appellant, Mr. Naude, was suspended from practice as an attorney pending an investigation by the South African Legal Practice Council (LPC) following complaints regarding his conduct in relation to trust funds. The LPC alleged misrepresentation and non-compliance with professional rules, leading to an urgent application for suspension. The legal issue concerned whether Mr. Naude's actions warranted suspension and if the LPC had properly investigated the complaints against him. The court held that there was no prima facie case for suspension, as Mr. Naude's conduct did not constitute misrepresentation or breach of professional conduct. The appeal was upheld, and the LPC's application for suspension was dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Exception — Pleadings — Exception to particulars of claim for failure to disclose a cause of action — Plaintiff, Sayelo (Pty) Ltd, claimed damages from Defendants, Gemini Trust and its trustees, for losses due to a fire at leased premises — Defendants excepted on grounds that Plaintiff's claim was delictual and contradicted the terms of the lease agreement, which excluded liability for fire damage — Court held that the Plaintiff's claim was unsustainable as it failed to establish a duty of care due to the binding terms of the lease, which exonerated the Defendants from liability for the alleged damages — Exception upheld, Plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Criminal Law — Sentencing — Life imprisonment for murder — Appellant convicted of murder and rape of minor cousin — Appellant's age at time of murder 18 years, with prior rapes occurring when he was a minor — Trial court imposed life sentence for murder and 20 years for rape, running concurrently — Appellant appealed against life sentence, arguing for mitigating factors including youth and personal circumstances — Court held that the trial court did not misdirect itself in sentencing, finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from the minimum sentence — Appeal against life sentence dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Administrative Law — Municipal Planning Law — Judicial review of municipal planning decisions — Second review of the Municipality’s Appeal Authority confirming refusal of rezoning application — Applicant sought to rezone property in Technopark for mixed-use development — Appeal Authority relied on 'corrected' Municipal Spatial Development Framework (MSDF) not gazetted, contrary to legal requirements — Court found reliance on unapproved MSDF constituted an error of law — Review upheld, decision set aside, and matter remitted for further reconsideration.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 70/100 Appeal — Motion proceedings — Genuine dispute of fact — Appellants appealed against the judgment of the court a quo which granted the Respondent's application for payment of an alleged outstanding balance under a Loan Agreement. The Appellants contended that there was a material dispute regarding the calculation of the debt, which could only be resolved through oral evidence at trial. The court a quo found no genuine dispute of fact. The appeal court held that the court a quo erred in determining the matter on affidavit alone, as the disputes raised were genuine and required a trial for resolution. The appeal was upheld, and the matter was referred to trial.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Labour Law — Unfair Labour Practice — Review of Arbitration Award — Applicant, a messenger/driver, applied for a compliance inspector position but was scored 1.2 points by a recused panelist, resulting in a total score of 99 points. The second respondent found that the scoring was not unfair and that the applicant was not qualified for the position. The applicant challenged the decision, arguing that the scoring method was arbitrary and prejudicial. The Labour Court held that the scoring of 1.2 points was grossly unreasonable and that the applicant was unfairly disadvantaged, leading to the conclusion that the third respondent committed an unfair labour practice by not recommending the applicant for appointment. The court ordered the applicant's promotion and awarded costs against the third respondent.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellants convicted of murder with dolus directus and sentenced to life imprisonment — Central issue whether the state proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the second appellant's alibi — State failed to investigate or call alibi witness, resulting in a material omission — Trial court erred in rejecting the alibi without proper engagement with the evidentiary implications — Appeals upheld, convictions and sentences set aside.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Pension Funds — Distribution of death benefits — Section 37C of the Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956 — Determination of dependants — Proper investigation required — Applicant, Tshifhiwa Mutsila, contested the distribution of death benefits following the death of her husband, Mr. Mutsila, asserting that the Fund improperly included Ms. Masete and her children as dependants without adequate investigation into their claims. The High Court found that the Fund failed to conduct a thorough investigation, leading to an improper distribution decision. The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the Fund's decision, citing procedural fairness issues. The Constitutional Court granted leave to appeal, ultimately holding that the Fund did not properly exercise its discretion in determining dependency and remitting the matter for a fresh determination of equitable allocation based on the circumstances as of the date of death.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Summary Judgment — Application for summary judgment — Plaintiffs seeking payment from defendant as surety for arrear rental — Defendant raising multiple defences including Covid-19 impact and alleged misrepresentation — Court finding only one defence raised a triable issue — Application for summary judgment refused, defendant granted leave to defend, and each party to bear their own costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 45/100 Criminal Law — Application for reconsideration of special leave to appeal — Applicant convicted of fraud and contravention of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act — Application for reconsideration struck from the roll due to lack of exceptional circumstances — Appeal against sentence dismissed as not disproportionate to severity of offences.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 75/100 Criminal Law — Sentencing — Minimum sentence for rape — Appeal against life imprisonment for two counts of rape — Appellant convicted of raping an adult female victim and sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court — Appellant argued that personal circumstances constituted substantial and compelling reasons for a lesser sentence — Trial court found no such circumstances existed, emphasizing the brutal nature of the crimes and the impact on the victim — Appeal dismissed, confirming the trial court's discretion in imposing the minimum sentence.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Declaratory relief — Impoundment of property — Applicants sought declaratory and interdictory relief against the City of Johannesburg for unlawful impoundment of advertising equipment — Applicants eng...

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Murder — Common purpose — Accused charged with two counts of murder, arson, and assault — State's case based on testimony of a single witness identifying accused as participants in mob justice leading to deaths of two victims — Accused denied involvement, raising alibi defenses — Court found identification evidence credible and reliable, despite challenges — Accused found guilty of murder based on common purpose doctrine.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Bail — Appeal against refusal of bail — Appellant charged with murder and attempted murder — Initial bail application refused; subsequent application based on alleged new facts — New facts included survivor's recantation of identification and appellant's health issues — Magistrate found new facts insufficient to establish exceptional circumstances for bail — Appeal dismissed as magistrate's discretion not exercised wrongly and strong evidence against appellant remained.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Eviction — Unlawful occupation — Lawfulness of occupation under sale agreement — Applicant sought eviction of respondent from property, claiming unlawful occupation; respondent contended occupation was lawful under a sale agreement. Court found that the respondent's initial lawful occupation had not become unlawful, as the sale agreement remained extant and unchallenged by the applicant. The application for eviction was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Customary Marriage — Validity of customary marriage — Plaintiff instituted divorce proceedings claiming a customary marriage with the Defendant — Parties engaged in lobola negotiations, with R10,000 paid as part of the agreed lobola — Defendant disputed the existence of the marriage, arguing it was not celebrated according to custom — Court found that the customary marriage was valid as both parties consented, and the necessary negotiations and agreements were made, including the acknowledgment of the Plaintiff as a makoti — Divorce proceedings allowed to proceed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Minimum sentences — Accused found guilty of multiple counts of rape, housebreaking, and kidnapping — Evidence of DNA linking accused to victims — Victims' testimonies corroborated by medical evidence — Accused's bare denials deemed implausible — Minimum sentences applicable due to age of victim and infliction of grievous bodily harm. The accused was charged with six counts, including housebreaking with intent to commit offences, kidnapping, and the raping of three young women in Mount Ayliff between 2013 and 2014. The State presented DNA evidence linking the accused to the crimes, alongside credible testimonies from the victims detailing the assaults. The accused denied the allegations but provided no substantial evidence to support his claims. The court held that the State proved the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, warranting the imposition of minimum sentences as prescribed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act due to the age of one victim and the grievous bodily harm inflicted on another.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Criminal Procedure — Death of Accused — Termination of charges and cancellation of arrest warrant — Accused died after pleading not guilty but before conviction — Magistrate's cancellation of arrest warrant and withdrawal of charges deemed procedurally incorrect — Common law principle that death terminates prosecution upheld — Review of lower court's decision to set aside withdrawal of charges and remittance for proper procedural handling.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Tort — Unlawful arrest — Use of force by police — Plaintiff claimed damages for injuries sustained during police shooting incident — Plaintiff alleged unlawful and negligent shooting by SAPS members while attempting to arrest a dangerous suspect — Incident occurred during operation targeting a high-risk criminal involved in violent crimes — Court found that police acted within the bounds of the law, using reasonable and proportional force in response to perceived threats — Plaintiff's claims dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Eviction — Extension of Security of Tenure Act — Termination of right of residence — Appeal against dismissal of eviction application — Appellants contending that respondents' right of residence terminated with employment — Respondents asserting independent rights of residence — Court finding procedural and substantive defects in termination process — Requirement for fair process under ESTA not met — Eviction order invalid as respondents had rights of residence unconnected to employment.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 68/100 Restraint of trade — Enforcement of restraint and confidentiality undertakings — Application for leave to appeal against enforcement of restraint clause prohibiting former employee from dealing with any customers of new employer, regardless of prior connections — Legal issue of whether the order exceeded the scope of the restraint clause and whether a breach of confidentiality was established — Court held that the restraint clause's purpose justified its broad application, and that a reasonable apprehension of harm was sufficient to enforce the confidentiality undertakings, thus denying leave to appeal.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 65/100 Company Law — Shareholding — Validity of share certificates — Applicants sought declaratory orders regarding their shareholding in the Second Respondent, asserting that they were valid shareholders based on verbal agreements and subsequent resolutions — First Respondent contested validity, claiming he remained the sole shareholder and that agreements were invalid — Court found that the Applicants had established their shareholding through payments and company resolutions, dismissing the Respondent's claims and declaring the Applicants' share certificates valid — Conduct of the First Respondent in administering the Second Respondent's affairs declared unlawful.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Extradition — Authority to request extradition — Applicant sought to review and set aside extradition request made by the Director of Public Prosecutions — Applicant contended that the request was unconstitutional as it was made without the Minister of Justice's authority — Court held that the extradition request was invalid as only the Minister of Justice has the power to make such requests, in line with the Supreme Court of Appeal's decision in Schultz v Minister of Justice, which remains binding.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 55/100 **Case Summary: SATAWU obo Sibusiso Sibeko v G4S Cash Solutions (Labour Court of South Africa, Johannesburg)** In this case, the Labour Court addressed the issue of backpay for Mr. Sibusiso Sibeko, who was reinstated following an arbitration award after being dismissed for misconduct in May 2015. The arbitration ruling mandated his reinstatement effective from July 2016, but he did not return to work until January 2021 due to the employer's attempts to appeal the decision. The Respondent, G4S Cash Solutions, contended that Sibeko had not tendered his services during the intervening period and had taken up other employment, thus disqualifying him from receiving backpay. The Court found in favor of the Applicant, determining that he had indeed tendered his services as required by the arbitration award, but the Respondent had refused to accept his return. The evidence presented by the Respondent regarding Sibeko's alleged employment during the period in question was insufficient to negate his claim. The Court emphasized that reinstatement should restore the employee to their previous position and terms, including backpay for the period of absence due to the employer's failure to comply with the arbitration ruling. Consequently, the Court ordered G4S Cash Solutions to pay Sibeko backpay from the date of his reinstatement order until his actual return to work.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Interdict — Arrest — Threatened arrest for attendance at court — Applicant sought interdictory relief against imminent arrest for a Schedule 1 offence of fraud — Applicant contended that arrest would violate his constitutional rights and the South African Police Service Standing Orders, which require arrest to be a last resort — Court found prima facie case for violation of Standing Orders due to failure to consider less severe means of securing attendance — Rule nisi granted to restrain arrest pending return day, with consideration of exceptional circumstances regarding the applicant's special needs child.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 40/100 Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against judgment regarding accrual claim — Applicant ordered to pay respondent R3 311 897.00 as part of matrimonial property settlement — Applicant contended that trust assets should not be included in his estate for accrual calculation — Court found no reasonable prospects of success in the appeal — Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Public Protector — Jurisdiction — Complaint of occupational detriment — Mr. Bloem alleged that Greater Taung Municipality suspended and dismissed him in retaliation for a protected disclosure regarding corruption — The Public Protector's jurisdiction to investigate the complaint was affirmed, as it fell within the scope of Section 182(1) of the Constitution and the Protected Disclosure Act — The Municipality's argument that the Public Protector lacked jurisdiction was dismissed, as her powers are not ousted by the Labour Relations Act. Public Protector — Remedial action — The Public Protector ordered the reinstatement of Mr. Bloem with backpay, finding that the Municipality's actions constituted unfair dismissal and occupational detriment — The Municipality's challenge to the lawfulness of the remedial action was rejected, as the Public Protector's discretion to impose appropriate remedies is supported by constitutional principles and does not require adherence to Labour Relations Act procedures. Costs — The application for review by the Municipality was dismissed with costs, as Mr. Bloem was successful in his opposition to the review.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Labour Law — Strike Action — Interdict against strike — Application to confirm rule nisi and interim order interdicting strike action and violence — Requirements for interdict not met — Strike action deemed protected under the Labour Relations Act — Interim order confirmed only in respect of picketing and violence. The applicants sought to confirm a rule nisi and interim order that interdicts strike action initiated by the first respondent, a trade union, claiming that the union's request for organizational rights was improperly handled. The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate a clear right to an interdict against the strike, as the union's right to strike is constitutionally protected. The court confirmed the interim order only to prohibit picketing and violence due to the absence of established picketing rules.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Public Participation — Appointment of Commissioners — National Assembly's obligation to facilitate public involvement — Corruption Watch challenged the appointment process of Commissioners to the Commission for Gender Equality, alleging insufficient public participation and inadequate information provided to the public — Court found that the National Assembly failed to comply with its constitutional obligation to facilitate reasonable public involvement, rendering the appointments invalid — Declaration of invalidity suspended for 12 months to allow for a compliant appointment process.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Trust law — Suretyship agreement — Validity of suretyship entered into by trustees — Dispute over whether two out of three trustees could bind the trust in the absence of the third trustee — Trust deed provisions requiring unanimous decisions for certain actions — Court held that the deed of suretyship was validly executed by the two attending trustees at a quorate meeting, as the trust deed allowed for such action under the circumstances.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Labour Law — Strike Action — Interdict against strike — Application by City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality to interdict strike action by Municipal Employees & Civil Servants Union (MECSU) — MECSU issued strike notice citing various demands, some relating to essential services — Court found strike notice defective for lack of clarity and failure to comply with notice requirements — Those identified as engaged in designated essential services prohibited from striking, while those classified as "non-essential" may strike if compliant notice is issued — Application partially successful, with no order as to costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 63/100 Labour Law — Review of arbitration award — Condonation for late filing — Applicants sought to review an arbitration award that found the second applicant's dismissal unfair and awarded compensation instead of reinstatement. The application was filed outside the six-week period stipulated in s145(1)(a) of the LRA, prompting a request for condonation. The second respondent failed to oppose the application, leading to a hearing where the court found the first respondent's decision to award compensation unsupported by evidence and contrary to the primary remedy of reinstatement. Condonation granted, and the arbitration award set aside, with the matter remitted for de novo arbitration.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Application for leave to appeal — Dismissal of application for declaratory orders — Applicant sought to challenge the validity of his dismissal by PRASA on grounds of improper appointment of disciplinary hearing members and alleged unlawful procurement processes — Court found no reasonable prospects of success in appeal, affirming that the applicant's dismissal was valid and had not been set aside by any competent authority — Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 52/100 Labour Law — Review of arbitration award — Application for review of an arbitration award finding dismissal substantively fair — Applicant's dismissal for gross misconduct following a physical altercation with a subordinate — Commissioner allowed hearsay evidence and did not permit a witness to testify, impacting the fairness of the proceedings — Review granted, award set aside, and matter remitted for a new hearing before a different commissioner.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Constitutional Law — Right to a fair hearing — Appeal against determination of compensation — Vodacom (Pty) Ltd sought leave to appeal against the Supreme Court of Appeal's decision which substituted the High Court's order without a cross-appeal from the first respondent, Nkosana Kenneth Makate — Vodacom contended that the Supreme Court of Appeal's judgment constituted a total failure of justice due to its disregard for key factual issues and evidence — The Constitutional Court found that the Supreme Court of Appeal had failed to properly consider the evidence and issues before it, leading to a breach of the rule of law and the right to a fair hearing — Appeal upheld, Supreme Court of Appeal's order set aside, and matter remitted for re-hearing by a differently constituted panel.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Delict — Gross negligence — The plaintiff, as the father of a minor child, sought damages from the defendant, a casino, after the child was electrocuted by an exposed live wire at the kiddie ice-skating rink on the defendant's premises. The defendant admitted to ordinary negligence but denied gross negligence, arguing that the incident was caused by an independent contractor's actions. The court found that the defendant's failure to secure the area and ensure safety after the removal of the Christmas tree constituted gross negligence, as it created a foreseeable risk of harm to the public, particularly children. The defendant was held vicariously liable for the injuries sustained by the minor child.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 55/100 In the judgment of case number 035118/2024, delivered on July 31, 2025, the court addressed an application for postponement made by City Power, represented by Mr. Loopoo of the Johannesburg Bar. The court noted that City Power had not paid its legal representatives for several months, leading to their non-appearance at the hearing. The court expressed concern over City Power's apparent lack of respect for the court and its own interests, highlighting that the failure to pay legal fees raised questions about the seriousness of its position in the ongoing litigation. The court emphasized that the delays in the arbitration process had already caused significant prejudice to the opposing party, Devi nity Trading, which had been waiting for payment since an arbitration award was made 18 months prior. The court further assessed the balance of prejudice between the parties and City Power's prospects of success in the main application. It concluded that City Power's chances of successfully challenging the arbitration award were virtually nonexistent, as the grounds for review cited by City Power did not meet the stringent requirements set out in the Arbitration Act. The court found that the alleged irregularities in the arbitrator's conduct were not substantiated by the evidence presented. Consequently, the court determined that there was minimal prejudice to City Power in denying the postponement, leading to the refusal of the application for postponement.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Customary Law — Validity of marriage — Applicant seeks declaration of validity of marriage at customary law — Dispute arises over alleged divorce and existence of marriage — Insufficient evidence presented regarding customs governing marriage and divorce — Court finds lack of material facts prevents determination of validity — Matter referred to trial for resolution of disputes and potential mediation.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Companies — Liquidation — Payments made after winding-up application — Applicants sought to declare payments void under s 341(2) of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 — First respondent contended that s 348 does not apply when liquidation order obtained under s 130(5)(c) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 — Payments made after winding-up application launched by creditor — Court held that s 348 applies, rendering payments void as they were made after the commencement of winding-up proceedings — First respondent ordered to repay amount of R22,452,067.10 to the liquidators, with interest.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Damages — Road Accident Fund — Quantum of damages for loss of income — Plaintiff claims damages on behalf of minor child injured in motor vehicle accident — Defendant acknowledges liability for 100% of damages — Court considers expert reports on child’s pre- and post-accident cognitive abilities and potential future earnings — Difficulty in predicting academic and career progression of a toddler — Court applies higher contingency deduction due to uncertainties in achieving higher qualifications — Plaintiff awarded R 3 964 362.10 for loss of earnings, with provisions for trust establishment for minor child’s benefit.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Eviction — Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act — Urgent application for eviction of unlawful occupiers — Applicants, owners of sectional title units in Clarendon Heights, sought urgent eviction of unlawful occupiers who had ceased paying rent and engaged in unlawful conduct — Court found that the unlawful occupation posed a real and imminent danger of substantial injury to property and other lawful occupants — Eviction granted under section 5 of the PIE Act, pending final determination under section 4 — Occupiers failed to provide evidence of homelessness or compliance with court orders, undermining their defense against eviction.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Negligence — Motor vehicle accident — Liability for damages — Plaintiff injured in collision with tractor driven by insured driver — Plaintiff contended that insured driver was solely negligent in failing to ensure safe entry onto gravel road — Defendant argued contributory negligence on part of plaintiff — Court found insured driver solely responsible for collision due to failure to keep a proper lookout and execute a safe maneuver — Defendant liable for 100% of plaintiff's damages and costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Agricultural Law — Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act 70 of 1970 — Definition of agricultural land — Appellants sought a declarator that their property does not constitute agricultural land and challenged the Minister's refusal to permit subdivision — The property, located within the Ekurhuleni Urban Edge, was deemed high potential agricultural land by the Minister, who cited the need to protect food security — The High Court dismissed the application, leading to an appeal. Legal issue — Whether the definition of 'agricultural land' in section 1 of the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act applies to the appellants' property and whether the Minister's decision was rational. Holding — The appeal succeeded in part; the Minister's decision was reviewed and set aside, and the application for subdivision was referred back for reconsideration, with the Minister ordered to pay costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Conviction and sentencing — Appellant convicted of two counts of rape of minor girls aged 10 and 12 — Appellant's appeal against conviction and life sentence based on alleged inadequacies in trial record and credibility of complainants — Court found trial record sufficient for adjudication despite imperfections — Evidence of complainants deemed credible and reliable, with corroborating medical findings — No substantial and compelling circumstances found to justify deviation from mandatory life sentence — Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Custody — Shared residency — Appeal against interim order regarding primary residence of minor child — Appellant sought variation to have child reside primarily with her — Respondent opposed, asserting order served best interests of child — High levels of conflict between parents and unilateral relocation by appellant impacted contact arrangements — Court found shared residency arrangement appropriate, with phased implementation — Appeal upheld, order varied to establish primary residence with appellant during school terms and with respondent during school holidays, ensuring regular contact with both parents.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Administrative Law — Review of administrative action — Applicants sought review of the Department of Trade and Industry's refusal to grant a foreign film incentive for the film "Hammarskjold" — Applicants contended that the refusal was based on an erroneous interpretation of the relevant guidelines and the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act — Court found that the Department's decision was arbitrary and unlawful, as it failed to treat like cases alike and frustrated the Applicants' legitimate expectations — Court declared the refusal unconstitutional and invalid, allowing for substitution of the decision with a grant of the incentive.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Estate — Executors — Application to compel discovery — Appellants sought declaratory relief regarding the status of a prior court order compelling the First Appellant to produce financial records — The First Appellant failed to comply with the order for two years due to delayed service — Court a quo dismissed the application for declaratory relief, leading to an appeal — The appeal court found that the March 2020 order did not automatically dismiss the main application and that the Appellants were not barred from seeking relief — The appeal was upheld, and the main application was referred for oral evidence regarding the marriage status of the First Respondent to the deceased, with provisions for maintenance payments to the Appellants pending the outcome.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Contempt of Court — Non-compliance with court order — Applicant sought to hold respondent in contempt for failure to comply with a Rule 43(6) order regarding maintenance payments and provision of financial documents — Respondent argued non-compliance was due to applicant's refusal to sign necessary documents for fund release — Court found respondent's failure to comply was wilful and mala fide, constituting contempt — Respondent ordered to pay outstanding amounts and provide requested documents by specified date.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Civil Procedure — Admissions — Unlawful arrest and detention — Appellant sought damages for unlawful arrest and detention by police — Court a quo awarded limited damages for the period of detention prior to first court appearance — Appellant contended that the Minister of Police should be liable for the entire period of detention — Issue on appeal whether the respondent was liable for the entire period of detention following the unlawful arrest — Appeal dismissed; court upheld the finding that the respondent was only liable for the period of detention up to the first court appearance, as the evidence did not establish a causal link for the subsequent detention.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Judicial Review — Interim Relief — Application for interim interdict pending review of Minister's decision — Minister's decision not to extend Zimbabwe Exemption Permit (ZEP) regime challenged — High Court granted interim relief to protect ZEP holders — Minister appealed, arguing redundancy due to final relief granted in related case — Appeal dismissed; interim relief remains valid as it addresses distinct grounds not resolved in related case.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Community Schemes — Appointment of executive management agent — Applicant sought to review and set aside the appointment of an executive management agent (EMA) by the ombud, alleging procedural irregularities — Court found that the ombud failed to verify the validity of the resolution supporting the EMA's appointment, which did not meet the statutory threshold of 25% participation quota — Decision to appoint EMA reviewed and set aside due to lack of lawful authority and procedural compliance — Application for rescission of trustee appointment dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Delict — Unlawful arrest and detention — Quantum of damages — Appellant claimed damages for unlawful arrest and detention for 10 days, initially awarded R1,000,000 by trial court, reduced to R350,000 by full court — Appeal upheld, and damages increased to R580,000 — Court emphasized the need for fair compensation reflecting the severity of the appellant's treatment and infringement of constitutional rights.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Execution — Leave to execute pending appeal — Section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 — Appellant sought to suspend execution of a relocation order pending appeal — Respondent granted leave to relocate with minor child despite contested facts and absence of oral evidence — Court found that exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm were not established — Appeal upheld, execution of the relocation order suspended.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Succession — Joint wills — Massing and adiation — Applicants, children of deceased, sought recognition of joint will executed by parents — Deceased's acceptance of benefits under joint will constituted adiation, binding him to its terms — Respondents contested enforceability of joint will in South Africa, citing constitutional concerns and formalities — Court found statutory requirements for massing and adiation met, affirming validity of joint will — Orders made for acceptance of joint will and appointment of executors as nominated by beneficiaries under it.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Tax Law — Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011 — Default judgment — Condonation — Whether a party is exempt from applying for condonation for late filing of a Rule 31 statement after receiving a Rule 56(1) notice — Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (SARS) issued an additional assessment against Virgin Mobile South Africa (Pty) Ltd for the 2014, 2015, and 2016 tax years. After failing to file a Rule 31 statement within the prescribed period, SARS complied with a Rule 56(1) notice but the taxpayer applied for default judgment. The tax court dismissed SARS's application to set aside the default judgment as an irregular step. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that compliance with a Rule 56(1) notice negates the need for a condonation application, thus the default judgment was an irregular step and should be set aside.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Administrative Law — Procedural Fairness — Change of School Name — Governing body of a public school resolved to change the name from DF Malan High School to DF Akademie due to its association with apartheid — Appellants challenged the decision on grounds of lack of statutory power, procedural unfairness, and irrationality — High Court dismissed the application, affirming the governing body's implied power to change the name and the fairness of the consultative process — Appeal dismissed; governing body acted within its powers, and the decision was rationally connected to the information before it.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Insolvency — Provisional sequestration — Application for provisional sequestration of the estate of the first respondent based on a liquidated claim — First respondent's failure to satisfy a court judgment resulting in an act of insolvency — Court finding that provisional sequestration would be to the advantage of creditors due to potential recovery of assets — Application granted. The applicant, Astra Constantine Inc, sought the provisional sequestration of the estate of the first respondent, Allan George Jones, following a judgment against him for R1,108,837.63, which remained unpaid. The first respondent opposed the application, arguing the claim was invalid and that sequestration would not benefit creditors. The court held that the applicant had established a liquidated claim, the first respondent had committed an act of insolvency, and that provisional sequestration would likely benefit creditors by allowing for an investigation into the first respondent's financial dealings.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Disciplinary Proceedings — Precautionary Suspension — Applicant's suspension lapsed ex lege — Applicant, a senior manager at Fetakgomo Tubatse Local Municipality, was placed on precautionary suspension on 18 October 2024, with a disciplinary hearing required to commence within three months as per regulation 6(6)(a) of the Local Government: Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers. The hearing did not commence within the stipulated period, leading the Applicant to seek a declaratory order that his suspension had lapsed and an interdict against ongoing disciplinary proceedings. The Municipality contended that the hearing was delayed due to the Applicant's absence. The court held that the suspension lapsed automatically as the hearing did not commence within the required timeframe, and granted the interdict against the disciplinary proceedings pending a review application.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Administrative Law — Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act — Internal remedy — Appellants challenged classification decision by the Commissioner under COIDA — Court of first instance held that section 91 of COIDA constituted an internal remedy, precluding judicial review — Appellants contended that the classification was irrational and did not reflect the nature of their business operations — Court found that the decision was arbitrary and not rationally connected to the information before the Commissioner, allowing for judicial intervention and substitution of the classification.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Constitutional Law — Judicial Services Commission — Designation of members — National Assembly's discretion — The National Assembly designated Dr. Mandlakayise John Hlophe as a member of the Judicial Services Commission despite his recent impeachment for gross misconduct, which included attempts to influence judges improperly. The Democratic Alliance, Freedom Under Law, and Corruption Watch challenged this designation, arguing that the National Assembly failed to exercise its discretion properly and did not consider Hlophe's unsuitability. The court held that the designation was unconstitutional and invalid, emphasizing that the National Assembly must assess the fitness of nominees to uphold the integrity of the judiciary.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Administrative Law — Petroleum Products Act — Appeal against Controller's decision — Minister's remittal of licence applications for re-evaluation — Whether Minister's decision constitutes administrative action — Whether Controller functus officio — Appellant, Pine Glow Investments, objected to the issuance of retail and site licences to Erf […] Highveld Technopark Investments and NAD Property Income Fund. The Controller initially refused the applications, but the Minister upheld the appeal and remitted the matter for re-evaluation. Pine Glow sought to review the Controller's decision post-remittal, arguing that the Minister lacked the authority to refer the matter back. The court found that the Minister's decision was administrative action and within his powers under the Petroleum Products Act, and that the Controller was not functus officio. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that Pine Glow failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Execution — Rescission of judgment — Application for rescission of consent order granted in favour of respondent — Applicant contending it was unaware of respondent's illegal immigration status at the time of settlement — Court finding allegations of ignorance misleading and false — Application for rescission dismissed due to substantial delay in bringing the application and lack of good cause — Applicant ordered to pay costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Arbitration — International arbitration agreement — Disputes arising from Common Terms Agreement — High Court lacking jurisdiction to determine disputes subject to arbitration — International Arbitration Act 15 of 2017 applicable — African Development Bank immune from court jurisdiction under Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Act 37 of 2001. The Industrial Development Corporation and African Development Bank sought to appeal a High Court ruling that dismissed their preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction in a dispute with Kalagadi Manganese and others, which arose from a Common Terms Agreement mandating arbitration in London for any disputes. The High Court had found that it had jurisdiction over the matter, despite the arbitration clause. The legal issue was whether the High Court had jurisdiction to hear the dispute given the existence of a binding arbitration agreement and the immunity of the African Development Bank from legal process. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court erred in asserting jurisdiction, as the disputes were clearly subject to the arbitration clause in the Common Terms Agreement, and the African Development Bank was immune from the court's jurisdiction. The appeal was upheld, and the High Court's order was set aside, with the application stayed pending arbitration.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Companies — Winding-up — Application for winding-up of Selective Empowerment Investments 1 Ltd by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) on grounds of insolvency and just and equitable — High Court found company insolvent and granted final winding-up order — Appeal against winding-up order — Whether CIPC had standing to apply for winding-up based on just and equitable grounds — Whether Selective was insolvent — Appeal upheld; final winding-up order set aside and substituted with provisional winding-up order, allowing for interested parties to show cause why final order should not be granted.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Ownership — Transfer of ownership — Requirements for delivery — Respondents claimed ownership of goods held by appellant, asserting that ownership passed upon clearing customs — Appellant contended that no valid transfer of ownership occurred as respondents were not parties to the relevant contracts and failed to prove delivery — Court held that the respondents did not establish ownership due to lack of evidence of delivery, and the appellant's lien over the goods remained valid, necessitating further judicial determination of ownership and lien claims.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 75/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of three counts of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment — Appellant contended that complainant's testimony, being that of a single witness, should have been treated with caution and that medical evidence did not corroborate penetration — Trial court found complainant's testimony credible and consistent, rejecting appellant's version as implausible — Legal issue of whether the trial court misdirected itself in assessing evidence and sentencing — Court of Appeal upheld both conviction and sentence, finding no material misdirection and affirming the appropriateness of the life sentence given the gravity of the offences.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Damages — Road Accident Fund — Claim for past medical expenses — Plaintiff's medical expenses paid by medical aid scheme — Defendant's argument of unjust enrichment rejected — Court held that benefits received from a medical aid scheme do not negate the plaintiff's right to claim damages from the Road Accident Fund — Defendant ordered to pay the full amount of past medical expenses incurred by the plaintiff.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Unlawful Arrest — Detention — Claim for damages arising from unlawful arrest and detention — Plaintiff arrested on suspicion of armed robbery based on insufficient evidence linking him to the crime — Arresting officer failed to establish reasonable grounds for suspicion as required by section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act — Court finds arrest and subsequent detention unlawful, with defendant liable for damages.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Environmental Law — Water Use Licence — Appeal against decision of Water Tribunal — Appellants, environmental organisations, challenged the issuance of a water use licence to Atha-Africa Ventures for coal mining activities — Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding the decision reasonable and compliant with the National Water Act — High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal — Key issues included the interpretation of sections 24 and 27 of the National Water Act, the application of the precautionary principle, and the alleged failure to consider socio-economic impacts — Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel, on grounds of vexatious litigation and abuse of court process.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Administrative law — Review under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 — Failure to exhaust internal remedies — Application for exemption under s 7(2)(c) of PAJA — Meaning of ‘exceptional circumstances’ — Chief Director’s approval of Environmental Authorisations (EAs) under the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 — EAs conditional on further steps before implementation — High Court’s review and set aside of decisions — Appellants contending that respondents failed to exhaust internal remedies before judicial review — Court held that the high court lacked jurisdiction to entertain grounds not raised in internal appeal without an application for exemption — Appeal upheld, high court order set aside, and application dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Execution — Road Accident Fund — Payment of claims — Appellant (RAF) appealed against order requiring payment of claims to attorneys representing plaintiffs — RAF admitted liability but contested payment to attorneys due to alleged fraudulent conduct by one director — Court held that RAF must comply with court orders for payment as no valid basis for withholding payment was established — Appeal against order to pay attorneys dismissed, but appeal against review of administrative decision upheld, as no evidence of such decision was provided — Costs awarded to respondents.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Guarantee — Demand for payment — Distinction between separate demands — Exxaro issued two demands on ABSA under a guarantee, the first being rejected for lack of authority, and the second not formally rejected — ABSA's failure to respond to the second demand precluded it from claiming non-compliance with the guarantee — The second demand was made before the guarantee expired and was not unconscionable — Exxaro entitled to payment of the amount specified in the second demand.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Sexual Offences — Conviction and sentencing for rape and sexual assault — Appellant convicted of two counts of rape and one count of sexual assault against his 13-year-old stepdaughter — Minimum sentence of life imprisonment imposed for rape under the Criminal Law Amendment Act — Appellant's defence based on consent rejected — Complainant's consistent testimony and corroboration by her mother deemed credible — Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed as no substantial and compelling circumstances found to deviate from minimum sentence.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Unlawful Arrest and Detention — Damages — Action for damages arising from unlawful arrest and detention — Plaintiff arrested on suspicion of rape and detained for approximately 16 months — Charges withdrawn prior to release — Court found arrest unlawful due to lack of reasonable suspicion and inadequate investigation by arresting officer — Defendant liable for damages resulting from unlawful arrest and continued detention — Award of R1,500,000.00 in damages for the severe impact on the plaintiff's life and the long duration of detention.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Constitutional Law — Search and seizure — Admissibility of evidence obtained under defective search warrant — Section 35(5) of the Constitution — The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed against the acquittal of the respondents on drug-related charges, arguing that evidence obtained under a defective search warrant should be admissible. The regional court and high court had ruled the evidence inadmissible due to formal defects in the warrant. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the admission of the evidence would not render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice, thus overturning the lower courts' decisions and remitting the matter back to the regional court for trial continuation.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Delict — Negligence — Duty of care — Parents of toddler seeking damages for drowning incident at Mandela House — Plaintiffs alleging negligence on part of Minister's employees for failing to secure premises and swimming pool — Minister denying liability, asserting that premises were not open to the public and that plaintiffs' son had no authorization to enter — Court finding that Minister's employees failed to take reasonable steps to secure premises and prevent access to swimming pool, constituting negligence — Minister held liable for damages suffered by plaintiffs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Family Law — Children's Rights — Registration of Fatherhood — Section 11(5) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 51 of 1992 — DNA testing not mandatory. First and second applicants, a couple living together with two children born outside of marriage, sought to have the first applicant's name registered as the father on the children's birth certificates. The respondents contended that DNA testing was required to confirm paternity. The court held that under section 11(5) of the Act, a high court confirmation of paternity dispenses with the need for DNA testing, allowing the first applicant's particulars to be recorded on the birth certificates without further proof of paternity. The application for summary judgment against the third respondent was dismissed, and the first applicant was confirmed as the father of the children, with the second applicant's consent dispensed with.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Legal Practice — Professional misconduct — Non-compliance with Legal Practice Act — Appellant, South African Legal Practice Council, appealed against the high court's dismissal of its application for the removal or suspension of the first respondent, Kgetsepe Revenge Kgaphola, from the roll of attorneys due to multiple breaches of professional conduct rules, including practicing without a fidelity fund certificate and failing to respond to LPC correspondence. The high court found the respondent's infractions not serious enough to warrant removal. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court misdirected itself in its factual inquiry and concluded that the respondent's misconduct was established. The court imposed a 12-month suspension, wholly suspended on conditions, and ordered costs against the respondent.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Interdict — Final interdict — Requirements for granting — Applicant, NSPCA, sought confirmation of rule nisi to prevent inhumane treatment of chickens by 1st respondent, Daybreak Foods — Urgent application arose from financial mismanagement leading to neglect and mistreatment of animals — Court found NSPCA had a clear right, injury was reasonably apprehended, and no other satisfactory remedy existed — Rule nisi confirmed with amendments to ensure humane treatment and adequate feeding of chickens.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Contempt of Court — Divorce proceedings — Applicant sought to hold respondent in contempt for failing to comply with court order regarding children's travel — Respondent's application for postponement to file answering affidavit denied due to lack of merit and as a delaying tactic — Respondent unlawfully retained children in Switzerland, violating agreed terms of court order — Court found respondent in contempt and ordered immediate return of children to South Africa.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Bail — Exceptional circumstances — Appeal against refusal of bail pending trial — Appellants, a married couple, charged with serious offences including kidnapping and sexual assault — Magistrate found no exceptional circumstances justifying bail — Appellants argued that the state’s case was weak and that they were not flight risks — Court held that the magistrate misdirected herself by failing to properly assess the strength of the state’s case and the evidence presented by the appellants — Exceptional circumstances established, warranting the granting of bail with stringent conditions.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Public Procurement — Tender Process — Unlawful appointment of service provider — The Municipality published a tender for accounting support services, including VAT review, and appointed the second respondent based on a quotation process, which was not compliant with its own Supply Chain Management Policy and the Municipal Supply Chain Management Regulations. The applicant challenged the Municipality's decision, arguing it was procedurally unfair and unconstitutional. The court held that the Municipality's decision to appoint the second respondent was constitutionally invalid and unlawful, as it failed to adhere to the required competitive bidding process for contracts exceeding R200,000, and set aside the appointment and any agreements made.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Town Planning — Building Approval — Review of municipal decision — Applicants sought to review the Municipality's approval of building plans for a three-storey dwelling, alleging non-compliance with town planning controls — The Municipality's approval was challenged on the grounds that the building exceeded the maximum height and number of storeys permitted — Court found that the building was unlawfully approved as it did not meet the statutory requirements, including the definition of a basement and maximum storey height — Decision of the Municipality set aside and costs awarded to the applicants.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Criminal Law — Murder — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment — Appellant's defence based on alibi, claiming he was not present at the scene — Two eyewitnesses testified to witnessing the appellant stab the deceased — Court found the State proved the appellant's presence at the scene beyond reasonable doubt — Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence upheld, reducing life imprisonment to 20 years due to lack of evidence of premeditation.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Unlawful Arrest and Detention — Arrest without warrant — Appellant arrested for possession of unlicensed firearm and ammunition — Police failed to conduct reasonable investigation prior to arrest — Appellant's explanation not adequately considered — Arrest deemed unlawful. The appellant was arrested by members of the SAPS without a warrant, following a stop of the vehicle he was driving, which was suspected to be linked to a robbery. The police found a firearm and ammunition in the vehicle, but the appellant claimed the vehicle belonged to his girlfriend and he had no knowledge of the firearm. The police did not investigate his claims. The legal issue was whether the arrest was lawful under section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires reasonable suspicion based on credible information. The court held that the arrest was unlawful as the police did not have reasonable grounds for suspicion, failing to investigate the appellant's version adequately. The appeal against the dismissal of the claims for unlawful arrest and detention was upheld, and the matter was remitted for determination of damages.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Water Supply — Mandament van Spolie — Urgent application for restoration of water supply — Applicants, owners of two properties, sought restoration after the City of Cape Town disconnected water supply due to alleged tampering — Respondent contended disconnection was justified due to misconduct — Court found applicants were in peaceful possession of water supply prior to disconnection and that the respondent's actions were unlawful, lacking due process — Urgency established due to the necessity of water for daily living — Respondent ordered to restore water supply and pay costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Intellectual Property — Passing off — Interdict against exhibition — Applicants, as Wozasisi Collective, sought an interdict against the respondents from continuing an exhibition titled “YOUR BEAUTY IS OUR CONCERN,” claiming it infringed their intellectual property rights established through a prior exhibition. — The respondents, led by photographer Trevor Stuurman, were accused of plagiarizing the applicants' thematic and titular concepts, which were closely aligned. — The court found that the applicants demonstrated a clear right to protection of their intellectual property, established urgency, and that the continuation of the exhibition posed a real threat of reputational and economic harm. — The respondents were interdicted from disseminating or exhibiting the infringing work pending further proceedings.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Parliamentary Ethics — Code of Ethical Conduct — Application for judicial review of disciplinary action against a Member of Parliament — Applicant, a member of the Judicial Service Commission, questioned a judge regarding a pending case involving his political party — Ethics Committee found breach of the Code for failing to act in the public interest — Legal issue of whether the Code applies to MPs while serving on the JSC — Court held that the Code applies irrespective of the capacity in which MPs operate, affirming the NA's authority to investigate and sanction breaches of the Code — Application dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Interdict — Preservation of estate assets — Applicant sought to interdict first to third respondents from withdrawing funds from deceased's business pending appointment of executor — First respondent withdrew substantial amount from business account shortly after deceased's death — Court found applicant had standing to seek preservation of estate assets but failed to establish case against second and third respondents — Relief confirmed only against first respondent, with balance of application discharged.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Contract Law — On-demand performance guarantees — Liability of guarantor — Set Square Development (Pty) Ltd sought payment under three on-demand guarantees issued by Power Guarantees (Pty) Ltd, claiming the contractor's default justified the demands. The High Court dismissed Set Square's claims regarding two guarantees, citing issues of contract existence and alleged fraud. Power Guarantees appealed against the order upholding one of Set Square's claims. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the guarantees were autonomous from the underlying contracts, and Set Square's demands complied with the guarantees' terms. The court dismissed Power Guarantees' defences of fraud and unconscionability, concluding that Set Square was entitled to payment under the guarantees.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Prescription — Unjustified enrichment — Section 12(3) of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969 — Commencement of prescription — Whether knowledge of legal conclusion applicable to claims against non-legal practitioners — Auckland Park Theological Seminary (ATS) ceded rights to Wamjay Holding Investments (Pty) Ltd (Wamjay) without consent from the University of Johannesburg (UJ) — UJ later cancelled the lease agreement, asserting the cession was invalid — Wamjay sought repayment of R6.5m from ATS based on unjustified enrichment after the Constitutional Court confirmed the invalidity of the cession — High Court found in favor of Wamjay, ruling that prescription had not begun to run — Supreme Court of Appeal held that prescription commenced on 5 October 2012 when UJ communicated its repudiation of the lease, thus overturning the High Court's decision and dismissing Wamjay's application.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 73/100 Execution — Summary judgment — Opposed application for summary judgment for payment of loan arrears — Respondent defaulted on home loan payments, admitting liability but raising defences based on unforeseen circumstances and constitutional rights — Court found respondent failed to demonstrate a bona fide defence or viable alternative to remedy default — Summary judgment granted in favour of applicant for payment of R2 201 567.77, interest, and declaration of property executable, with a reserve price set.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Interim Interdict — Requirements for granting — Applicants sought an interim interdict against Ekurhuleni Metropolitan pending a review of a tender award to Malaka for water meter supply — D&D alleged unlawful conduct by CEM in awarding the tender, claiming infringement of constitutional rights and technical specification non-compliance — Court held that D&D failed to establish a prima facie right, imminent irreparable harm, or that the balance of convenience favored granting the interdict — Application for interim interdict dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Contract — Enforceability of undertakings — Sourceworx sought to enforce an undertaking from Datacentrix to remove employee Khumo Mosiane from the Transnet project, alleging breach of a subcontract clause prohibiting employee poaching — Court found the undertaking unenforceable as it lacked binding intent, was contrary to public policy, and Sourceworx failed to demonstrate irreparable harm — Additionally, Mosiane was not joined as a party to the proceedings, which was necessary given his substantial interest in the matter.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Murder — Appeal against conviction — Appellant convicted of murder, robbery, and firearm-related charges — Evidence primarily from accomplice witness — Appellant contended that evidence was uncorroborated and his alibi was not properly considered — Court found that the evidence of the accomplice was clear and reliable, corroborated by other testimonies — Appellant's claim of accidental shooting rejected as the court determined intent to kill was established — Appeal dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 79/100 Damages — Loss of earning capacity — Claim for loss of earning capacity of a minor following a pedestrian accident — Plaintiff's failure to provide comprehensive expert evidence regarding brain injury — Court's reliance on circumstantial evidence and expert consensus regarding cognitive deficits — Holding that the minor suffered a mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) with sequelae and PTSD, impacting future earning capacity — Award of damages calculated with appropriate contingencies applied.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Criminal Law — Appeal against sentence — Appellant a minor at time of offence — Sentencing without pre-sentence report — Original sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment deemed inappropriate — Appeal upheld and sentence substituted with 2 years’ imprisonment. The appellant, a 16-year-old, pleaded guilty to attempted murder and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. The appeal focused on the court's failure to consider the appellant's age, personal circumstances, and the absence of a pre-sentence report. The court found the original sentence harsh and inappropriate, leading to the substitution of the sentence with 2 years’ imprisonment, antedated to the original sentencing date.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 58/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of raping former partner, sentenced to life imprisonment — Appellant contended that the trial court erred in accepting the complainant's evidence and rejecting his version of consensual intercourse — Court found that the trial court meticulously evaluated evidence, including the complainant's testimony and corroboration by her partner — Appellant's claims of improbabilities and contradictions in the complainant's evidence deemed immaterial — No substantial and compelling circumstances found to warrant deviation from the minimum sentence — Appeal dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 70/100 Delict — Road Accident Fund — Claim for damages arising from motor vehicle collision — Plaintiff seeking compensation for past and future loss of income and general damages — Defendant not admitting liability and failing to present evidence — Court satisfied of plaintiff's injuries and resultant impairments — Plaintiff awarded 100% of proven damages for past and future loss of income.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Execution — Perfection of notarial bond — Urgent application for possession of movable assets — Applicant sought to perfect a general notarial covering bond over the Respondent's assets due to substantial indebtedness — Respondent opposed the application and sought a stay pending a PAIA application — Court held that the Applicant demonstrated a clear right to perfect the bond based on the Respondent's admitted default and significant debt, justifying the urgency of the application — Respondent's grounds of opposition, including an alleged informal agreement and a pending PAIA request, were found to be without merit — Order granted in favor of the Applicant, allowing for the perfection of the bond and possession of the Respondent's assets.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Summary Judgment — Application for summary judgment — Special pleas of res judicata and non-joinder — Applicant sought payment under a surety agreement and a personal mortgage loan agreement — Respondent admitted liability but raised defences of res judicata and non-joinder — Court held that the respondent's defences were without merit as the claims were distinct and the respondent was jointly and severally liable — Summary judgment granted in favour of the applicant for the amounts claimed, with costs on an attorney and own client scale.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal law — Unlawful arrest and extradition — Appellant claimed unlawful arrest and abduction by South African Police Service (SAPS) in Tanzania — Respondents contended appellant was arrested by Tanzanian authorities and subsequently deported — High Court found appellant consented to return to South Africa — Appeal dismissed as appellant failed to establish unlawful arrest by SAPS, and her removal was deemed lawful under the circumstances.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Labour Law — Unfair Dismissal — Jurisdiction of CCMA — Employees dismissed for misconduct during unprotected strike — Employees argued that CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate dismissal dispute — Court held that the CCMA had jurisdiction as the dismissal was framed as misconduct, not participation in the unprotected strike — Dismissal deemed substantively fair based on evidence of misconduct including sabotage and interference with security personnel — Award set aside due to incomplete record and failure to adequately assess evidence — Matter referred back for re-arbitration before a different commissioner.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Legal Practice — Striking off — Legal practitioner found unfit to practice — Respondent, Mamolatelo Alfred Selota, was suspended in 2020 for misconduct but continued to practice unlawfully — Multiple instances of failing to maintain proper accounting records, practicing without a Fidelity Fund certificate, and overreaching clients — Cumulative effect of misconduct rendered the respondent unfit to practice law — Striking off from the roll of legal practitioners justified.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 57/100 Condonation — Late filing of opposing affidavit — Application for condonation by respondents for late submission of opposing affidavit in response to an application issued on 3 December 2024 — Court considers prospects of success, nature of relief sought, and importance of case — Poor explanation for delay noted, but no intention to delay proceedings found — Condonation granted, with costs awarded to applicant for opposing the application. Contract — Authority of trustees — Dispute regarding authority of second respondent to accept auction bid on behalf of the Michael Family Trust — Requirement for trustees to act jointly — Court finds that second respondent lacked authority to bind the trust as required by trust law — Application dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Public Law — Organ of State — Definition under the Legal Proceedings Act — Johannesburg Water, established to provide water services, deemed an organ of state. Dark Fibre claimed damages for cable damage caused by Johannesburg Water's contractors. Johannesburg Water raised a special plea for lack of notice under section 3 of the Legal Proceedings Act. The court held that Johannesburg Water is an organ of state as it performs a constitutional function, thus requiring compliance with the notice provisions of the Act. The appeal was upheld, and the matter was referred back for consideration of condonation for the notice failure.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 62/100 Intervention — Application for intervention — Applicants seeking to intervene in self-review of tender awarded to Thomson Reuters by the Office of the Chief Justice — Applicants former employees of OCJ, alleging false and defamatory statements regarding their conduct — Legal issue of whether applicants have a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the review proceedings — Court holding that applicants lack interest in the order sought, as they only seek to challenge the reasoning of the court, and thus the application for intervention is dismissed; further, scandalous allegations made against the Secretary General of the OCJ are struck out, and a punitive costs order is granted against the applicants.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 National Credit Act — Debt review — Interpretation of 'default' under section 103(5) — Applicant, a registered debt counsellor, sought a declaratory order that an application for debt review does not purge the default of the original credit agreement — Respondents, including banks, contended that a debt rearrangement purges the default — Court held that section 103(5) applies regardless of debt review status, affirming that default under the original credit agreement persists during debt review, and that the application for debt review does not cure the default.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Taxation — Business rescue — Characterization of tax liabilities — Whether income tax and VAT liabilities arising from assessments before commencement of business rescue are pre- or post-commencement debts — Appellant, a close corporation, commenced business rescue on 31 January 2018, with tax liabilities for the 2017 financial year and VAT for the period 01/2018 — High Court held these liabilities were post-commencement debts and could be set off against VAT refunds due to the appellant — Supreme Court of Appeal found both tax liabilities were pre-commencement debts, owed before the business rescue commenced, and not subject to set-off against post-commencement VAT refunds.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Trade Marks — Infringement — Likelihood of confusion — Applicants sought interdict against respondents for using "LENBUCOD," a mark similar to their registered trademark "MYBUCOD" — Both products identical in composition and appearance, differing only in name — Court to determine if "LENBUCOD" likely to deceive or confuse consumers — Applicants established likelihood of confusion based on historical market presence and similarity of marks — Respondents' defense of trademark invalidity rejected — Interdict granted, restraining respondents from using "LENBUCOD" and ordering destruction of infringing materials.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Labour Law — Security for arbitration award — Validity of security bond — The Labour Appeal Court considered the validity of a security bond issued by the Director-General of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment to suspend the operation of an arbitration award pending review. The Labour Court had previously ruled that the bond did not constitute satisfactory security under section 145(7) of the Labour Relations Act due to non-compliance with section 66 of the Public Finance Management Act. The appeal addressed whether the security bond was subject to the PFMA and whether it was valid despite lacking a specified amount. The Labour Appeal Court held that the security bond constituted sufficient security as it related to an existing obligation, thus overturning the Labour Court's decision and allowing the appeal.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Divorce — Accrual system — Antenuptial contract — Declaration of commencement value — Applicant and respondent married out of community of property, subject to accrual system — Applicant sought to challenge the respondent's declared commencement value of R68.7 million in antenuptial contract during divorce proceedings — High Court found parties bound by the declared value, resulting in no accrual — Applicant appealed, arguing antenuptial contract served only as prima facie proof of value — Court held that antenuptial contract with declared value is conclusive proof, and applicant failed to prove an accrual — Appeal dismissed with costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Damages — Medical expenses — Quantum of damages for future medical and hospital expenses — Plaintiff's child born with cerebral palsy due to intrapartum hypoxia — Defendant conceded liability — Expert evidence presented on future medical needs and associated costs — Dispute over necessity and extent of future therapies and caregiver support — Court accepted expert recommendations for ongoing medical care, therapies, and caregiver costs, with adjustments for contingencies — Future medical expenses quantified and awarded accordingly.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Sentencing — Life imprisonment for incestuous rape — Appellant, the biological father of the victim, pleaded guilty to raping his 14-year-old daughter on two occasions, resulting in her pregnancy — The regional magistrate imposed a life sentence in accordance with the minimum sentencing provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 — Appellant appealed against the sentence, arguing that it was disproportionate and that he should have received a lesser sentence due to his guilty plea and potential for rehabilitation — Court held that the nature of the crime, particularly the familial relationship and the victim's age, warranted the minimum sentence, and found no misdirection by the sentencing court — Appeal against sentence dismissed.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Labour Law — Appointment of municipal officials — Rescission of appointment — Applicant appointed as Director of Technical Services by Municipal Council, but appointment rescinded following MEC's recommendation — Applicant challenges rescission as unconstitutional and irrational — Court finds that the Council acted unlawfully in rescinding the appointment based on MEC's influence, which constituted improper interference — Decision to re-advertise position set aside, and original appointment reinstated.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Constitutional Law — Access to courts — Rescission of orders — Applicant sought rescission of previous orders refusing leave to appeal and rescission of a decision by the Labour Court — Labour Court failed to adjudicate applicant's cross-review challenging a finding of guilt for corruption — Court held that the Labour Court's failure to consider the cross-review constituted a serious irregularity and violated the applicant's right to access to courts — Rescission granted, and matter remitted to the Labour Court for determination of the cross-review by another judge.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Damages — Loss of earnings — Claim for future loss of earnings on behalf of a minor child — Minor sustained mild to moderate traumatic brain injury in a motor vehicle accident — Defendant conceded negligence and settled general damages — Dispute over quantum of future loss of earnings — Plaintiff's experts established nexus between injuries and loss of earnings potential, while Defendant argued lack of evidence for future loss — Court found sufficient evidence of diminished earning capacity due to accident-related injuries — Awarded lump sum of R3,849,567 for future loss of earnings, applying appropriate contingencies.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 80/100 Criminal Law — Sexual Offences — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of two counts of rape under section 3 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 — Appellant's appeal upheld, convictions set aside and replaced with contraventions of section 15(1) of the same Act — Sentences of 15 years and life imprisonment replaced with five years for each count, three years of the second count running concurrently with the first, resulting in an effective term of seven years' imprisonment — Court found that the evidence did not support the original convictions of rape, and that the appellant's version of events was reasonably possibly true.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Criminal Law — Rape — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Appellant convicted of raping his 14-year-old stepdaughter and sentenced to life imprisonment — Appellant's appeal contended that the trial court erred in finding the State proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that there were no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from the minimum sentence — Court upheld the conviction, finding the complainant's testimony credible and corroborated by DNA evidence, and that the trial court properly considered the gravity of the crime in sentencing.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 45/100 Civil Procedure — Amendment of pleadings — Application to amend particulars of claim — Applicant sought to amend claim for medical negligence based on alleged incorrect admission date to hospital — Respondent opposed amendment, arguing it was mala fide and did not raise a triable issue — Court found that the proposed amendment contradicted previous statements made by the applicant and was based on a document not completed at the time of admission — Application for amendment dismissed as it would not affect the outcome of the case and was deemed opportunistic.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Constitutional Law — Rights of Persons with Disabilities — Urgent application for direct access to remedy constitutional defects in the Copyright Act — Blind SA sought to protect rights of visually impaired persons pending legislative amendments — Court held that the lapse of interim provisions created a rights vacuum, necessitating the reading-in of section 19D to ensure access to accessible format copies for persons with disabilities — President ordered to pay costs of the application.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 National Credit Act — Credit insurance — Bundled insurance cover for vulnerable consumers — JDG Trading (Pty) Ltd sold credit life insurance to pensioners and disabled persons who were already unable to claim for retrenchment or disability — National Credit Regulator contended that such practices contravened sections 106(2)(a) and (b) of the Act as the insurance was unreasonable and at an unreasonable cost — Tribunal dismissed the Regulator's application, finding insufficient proof of unreasonableness — Court held that JDG's insurance cover was indeed unreasonable as it provided no meaningful benefit to the targeted consumers, thus violating the provisions of the Act.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Compensation — Occupational diseases — Appeal against Tribunal ruling — Appellant diagnosed with Post-traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder following work-related incidents — Tribunal initially set effective date of liability as 3 May 2007 and percentage of permanent disablement at 20% — Appellant contended that liability should date back to 6 May 1993, the date of the incident, and that he should be deemed 100% permanently disabled — Tribunal's findings deemed arbitrary and unsupported by evidence — Appeal upheld, Tribunal's decision set aside, and Compensation Commissioner ordered to accept liability from 6 May 1993 with 100% permanent disablement.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Labour Law — Settlement Agreement — Authority to Bind Municipality — Appellant sought to enforce a settlement agreement against the Municipality, claiming that the official who signed it had ostensible authority. The Labour Court dismissed the claim, ruling that ostensible authority cannot be applied to state organs without proper delegation of authority. The appeal raised the issue of whether the Municipality could be estopped from denying the official's authority based on ostensible authority. The Labour Appeal Court upheld the Labour Court's decision, concluding that the invocation of ostensible authority was untenable as the official lacked the requisite authority under the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, thus sanctioning an illegality.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Labour Law — Unfair dismissal — Review of arbitration award — Employee dismissed for refusal to return to work during COVID-19 pandemic — Employee's medical condition classified him as highly vulnerable — Commissioner found dismissal substantively unfair, ordering reinstatement without backpay and a final written warning — NHLS challenged the reasonableness of the award — Court upheld the commissioner's decision, emphasizing the need for reasonable accommodation of vulnerable employees and the unreasonableness of NHLS's demands during the pandemic.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 96/100 Citizenship — Constitutional validity — Section 6(1)(a) of the South African Citizenship Act 88 of 1995 — Automatic loss of citizenship upon voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship — Democratic Alliance challenged the constitutionality of the provision, arguing it infringes the right to citizenship without consent or forewarning — Supreme Court of Appeal declared the provision unconstitutional and invalid from its promulgation — Constitutional Court confirmed the order, declaring that citizens who lost citizenship under the provision are deemed not to have lost it.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Execution — Enforcement of court orders — Default judgment — Ngonyama parties obtained default judgment against Development Trust for transfer of shares and accounting — Six years of non-compliance with judgment — Ngonyama parties sought execution of orders — Court held that execution application was necessary to enforce established rights and granted relief sought, emphasizing the obligation to comply with final judgments.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 81/100 Constitutional Law — Jurisdiction — High Court's jurisdiction to review President's decision to assent to National Health Insurance Bill — High Court held to have jurisdiction as matter does not fall within exclusive jurisdiction of Constitutional Court. Facts — The Board of Healthcare Funders and the South African Private Practitioners Forum sought to review the President's decision to assent to and sign the National Health Insurance Bill, arguing that the decision was unconstitutional and lacked proper scrutiny. The President contended that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter, asserting that only the Constitutional Court could adjudicate such claims. Legal Issue — Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review the President's decision to assent to the National Health Insurance Bill and whether that decision is reviewable under the principle of legality. Holding — The High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter; the President's decision to assent to and sign the National Health Insurance Act is reviewable; the President is ordered to furnish the record of the impugned decision within ten days; and the respondents are ordered to pay the costs related to the application.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Tender — Award of tender — Authority to award — Raaleborg Environmental (Pty) Ltd applied to review the Cape Winelands District Municipality's repudiation of a tender award for waste management services, claiming the award was validly made before the bid validity period expired. The Municipality contended that the award was made by an unauthorized official and that the bid validity period had lapsed, rendering the award and subsequent contract void. The court held that the tender award was invalid as it was made by an unauthorized party after the bid validity period had expired, and thus the Municipality's actions to withdraw the award were lawful.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Valuation — Fair value determination — Application of discounts — Applicants sought to set aside the valuation report of the 23rd Respondent, arguing that it improperly included portfolio valuation and marketability discounts contrary to the settlement agreement, which only allowed for a minority discount. The valuer acknowledged uncertainty regarding the applicability of the additional discounts and deferred the decision to the arbitrator. The arbitrator upheld the valuation, leading to the applicants' review application. The court found that the valuer exceeded his mandate by applying the additional discounts, which were not permitted under the settlement agreement, resulting in an inequitable outcome. The court ordered the respondents to pay the Trust R11,136,219, with interest, and costs.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Legal Practice — Disciplinary proceedings — Review of decision — Applicant sought to review and set aside the decision of the Disciplinary Committee of the South African Legal Practice Council, which found her guilty of misconduct and recommended striking her name from the roll of legal practitioners. The applicant alleged procedural irregularities, including lack of notice and opportunity to present mitigating factors during the sanction phase of the hearing. The court found that the Disciplinary Committee acted irregularly by considering guilt and sanctions simultaneously without proper notification to the applicant, thus violating her right to a fair hearing. The sanctions imposed were set aside, and the matter was referred back for a new hearing on sanctions.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 78/100 Medical Negligence — Section 18(3) Application — Plaintiff's claim for damages due to medical negligence resulting in brain injury and cerebral palsy — Plaintiff sought urgent implementation of judgment pending appeal — Court required to assess 'exceptional circumstances' and irreparable harm under section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act — Plaintiff established exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm, while defendant failed to demonstrate potential harm — Court granted plaintiff's appeal, ordered costs on attorney and own client scale.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Patents — Validity of patent application — Interpretation of section 27 of the Patents Act, No. 57 of 1978 — The Regents of the University of California and others applied for an interim interdict against Eurolab and Dis-Chem for patent infringement of South African Patent No. 2007/10870, while Eurolab countered with a groundless threats application and a revocation application claiming the patent was invalid due to lack of entitlement to apply — Court held that the applicants failed to demonstrate they had acquired the right to apply for the patent from the inventors prior to the application date, rendering the patent invalid and subject to revocation under section 61(1)(a) of the Act.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 60/100 Road Accident Fund — Claims — Compliance with s 24 of the Road Accident Fund Act — Applicants sought declaratory orders for the registration of their claims after the Road Accident Fund (RAF) rejected their lodgment documents for non-compliance with statutory requirements. Both applicants were involved in motor vehicle accidents and submitted claims that were returned by the RAF due to missing documentation. The RAF objected to the validity of the claims, asserting that the documents did not meet the necessary compliance standards. The court held that the applications were dismissed as the RAF's objections constituted valid administrative action under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, and the applicants failed to demonstrate compliance with the substantive requirements of the Act.

REPORTABILITY SCORE: 52/100 Rescission of Judgment — Application for rescission — Jurisdictional requirements under rule 42(1)(a) — Applicant sought rescission of an order declaring him personally liable for debts under s 424 of the Companies Act, contending it was erroneously granted in his absence — Respondents argued proper notice was given and applicant failed to appear — Court found applicant did not meet jurisdictional requirements for rescission, as he was duly notified and did not provide a reasonable explanation for his default — Application dismissed with costs on scale C.