Your trial period has expired.
Please subscribe to a plan to continue using the app.
Evidence — Admissibility — Actuarial report — Applicant seeking to introduce actuarial report in support of pension claim — Respondents opposing on grounds of non-compliance with Rule 36(9) of Uniform Rules of Court — Court finding that actuarial report was inadmissible due to lack of proper foundation and failure to comply with evidential requirements — Rule nisi discharged and costs awarded against applicant.
Administrative Law — Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against judgment regarding transfer of mining right — Court finding no reasonable prospect of success in appeal — Interpretation of 'interest' in mining rights under section 11(1) of the MPRDA debated — Court refusing leave to appeal and ordering costs against applicant.
Family Law — Maintenance — Joinder of parties — Applicant seeks joinder of two major children as respondents in divorce proceedings to address maintenance obligations — First respondent opposes interdictory relief compelling compliance with court order regarding maintenance payments — Court finds joinder necessary due to children's direct interest in the outcome — Legal issue revolves around the applicant's request for interdictory relief and variation of maintenance obligations based on alleged non-compliance by the first respondent — Court holds that the joinder is appropriate and that the relief sought constitutes final relief, requiring the applicant to demonstrate a clear right and absence of suitable remedy.
Contempt of court — Breach of interdict — Respondent accused of making defamatory statements — Applicants sought committal for contempt — Respondent's denial of breach and claims of lack of control over social media posts — Court required to determine whether contempt proved beyond reasonable doubt. Respondent reposted a podcast interview allegedly containing defamatory statements about the applicants, which was deleted after a warning from their attorneys. The applicants failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that the respondent knowingly breached the court order, leading to the conclusion that the necessary elements of contempt were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Appeal — Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against interim order regarding minor children — Applicant sought leave to appeal following urgent motion proceedings initiated by Respondent for children's return after unilateral relocation — Court found order not appealable under section 16(3) of the Superior Courts Act, as it functioned as an interim regulation of children's care during pending matrimonial proceedings — Leave to appeal refused.
Eviction — Prevention of Illegal Eviction from Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 18 of 1998 — Application for eviction of unlawful occupiers — Applicant claiming ownership through sale in execution — Respondents challenging ownership based on alleged fraudulent dispossession — Court finding that pending ownership dispute precludes eviction — Application dismissed with costs.
Labour Law — Unfair Dismissal — Urgent application for interim relief pending final determination of alleged automatic unfair dismissal — Applicant dismissed for incapacity based on incompatibility after a lengthy process — Respondent contends that Labour Court lacks jurisdiction as the dispute must first be referred to conciliation under the Labour Relations Act — Court holds that jurisdiction is not established as the applicant failed to follow the prescribed dispute resolution process, rendering the application incompetent.
Labour Law — Urgent application — Withdrawal of application — Applicant withdrew urgent application for interdict pending disciplinary proceedings without tendering costs — First respondent entitled to seek costs for the abortive application — Court held that the issue of costs does not meet the requirements for urgency and should be dealt with in the ordinary course on the opposed motion roll — Application removed from the urgent roll.
Utility Billing — Sectional Title Scheme — Dispute over water charges — Applicant sought urgent relief against utility management company for disputed water charges linked to a leaking meter — Applicant claimed inability to purchase prepaid electricity due to arrear water debt — Respondent contended that billing errors had been corrected and applicant remained liable for charges — Court found that the applicant established urgency due to immediate threat to access electricity, but procedural irregularities in the application process were noted — Final interdictory relief sought was inappropriate given serious factual disputes, and the matter was not resolved in the applicant's favor.
Labour Law — Bargaining Council — Demarcation award — Review of arbitrator's ruling on scope of bargaining council — Merriman BP Service Station (Pty) Ltd operated a fuel service station and a Pick n Pay Express store on the same premises — Dispute over whether employees at the convenience store fell within the Motor Industry Bargaining Council's jurisdiction — Arbitrator ruled that the convenience store constituted an ancillary activity under the council's scope — Review application based on alleged errors of law in the arbitrator's interpretation of the scope — Court found that the arbitrator misapplied the legal criteria, leading to an incorrect conclusion regarding the demarcation of the businesses — Demarcation award set aside and substituted.
Labour Law — Administration of Trade Unions — Contempt of Court — Application for contempt against administrator of trade union following removal — First respondent's conduct not establishing wilful and mala fide non-compliance with court order — Declaratory relief and coercive order granted against first respondent. The Registrar of Labour Relations sought to compel the first respondent, Sono, to vacate his position as administrator of the Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing, Wood and Allied Workers’ Union (CEPPWAWU) following a court order that removed him and appointed Vosloo in his stead. Sono opposed the application, arguing for a further appeal and seeking to stay enforcement proceedings. The legal issue was whether Sono's actions constituted contempt of court and if the application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court was competent. The court held that Sono's conduct did not demonstrate the requisite intent for contempt, but granted declaratory relief and a coercive order compelling compliance with the court's previous order.