Your trial period has expired.
Please subscribe to a plan to continue using the app.
Criminal law — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Murder, attempted murder, and unlawful possession of a firearm — Appellants convicted based on cumulative evidence including eyewitness testimony, forensic and ballistic analysis, and DNA evidence — Common purpose not expressly alleged in charge sheet, but no prejudice established — Identification evidence corroborated by police pursuit and surrounding circumstances — Appellants' versions rejected as improbable — Sentences imposed found to be substantial and compelling, not shockingly inappropriate — Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed.
Condonation — Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act — Application for condonation for late notice of claim for unlawful arrest and detention — Claim accrues on release on bail, distinct from claim for malicious prosecution which accrues on favorable termination of prosecution — Applicant arrested on 6 January 2020, released on bail on 30 March 2020, and discharged on 2 October 2020 — Notice served on Minister on 17 November 2020, late by six to seven weeks — Good cause shown for delay, no unreasonable prejudice to respondents — Condonation granted in respect of the Minister and, as necessary, the National Director.
Companies — Removal of director — Application for removal of director under s 71(3) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 — Applicant alleging neglect and dereliction of duties by the respondent — Evidence presented by applicant insufficient to establish claims of neglect or dereliction — Tribunal finding that the core issue is a deadlock between the parties, which does not justify removal under s 71(3) — Application dismissed.
Labour Law — Disciplinary proceedings — Interim relief pending inquiry under section 188A(11) of the LRA — Employee alleging disciplinary charges linked to protected disclosures — Employee seeking interdict against disciplinary hearing — Exceptional circumstances justifying court's intervention established. The applicant, Peter Tebogo Jonker, served as Chief Mechanical Engineer for the Department of Public Works and Roads North West and faced disciplinary charges he claimed were retaliatory for making protected disclosures. He sought an urgent interdict to halt the disciplinary hearing pending a Bargaining Council inquiry into the allegations. The court found that Jonker satisfied the requirements for interim relief, warranting intervention in the disciplinary process.
Constitutional Law — Constitutionality of Legislation — Copyright Amendment Bill and Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill — Referral by the President regarding constitutionality of specific sections — Sections 6A, 7A, and 8A deemed incompetent for referral — Fair use exception in section 12A, and exceptions in sections 12B, 12C, 19B, and 19C found constitutional — Exceptions in subsections 12D(1)-(5) declared unconstitutional as arbitrary deprivation of property — Referral also applicable to corresponding sections in the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill.
Joinder — Non-joinder of accused in private prosecution — Appellant sought access to without-prejudice representations made by the accused to the public prosecutor following withdrawal of charges — Non-joinder of the accused deemed fatal as he had a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the application — Appeal dismissed with costs.
Administration of Estates — Spousal maintenance claim — Review of Master's decision — Appellant challenged the inclusion of a spousal maintenance claim in the liquidation and distribution account of the deceased estate, arguing it exceeded the estate's value and was not compliant with the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act 27 of 1990 — High Court dismissed the review application, affirming the Master's decision — Appeal dismissed with costs, confirming the Master's authority to determine the validity of the maintenance claim based on statutory provisions.
Companies — Exemption from appointment of social and ethics committee — Application by NewGold Issuer (RF) Limited for exemption under section 72(5) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 — Applicant seeks five-year exemption based on its status as a special-purpose issuer with no employees — Tribunal assesses whether statutory grounds for exemption established — Application refused as the Applicant did not demonstrate a formal substitute mechanism for SEC functions or that an SEC is unnecessary in the public interest — Inconsistencies in the founding affidavit regarding the Applicant's status and public-interest score further undermine the application.
Companies — Social and Ethics Committee — Exemption application — CRONIMET (RSA) (Pty) Ltd applied for exemption from appointing a Social and Ethics Committee, asserting that its operations do not significantly impact public interest and that the requirement is not proportionate to its size. The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to provide sufficient justification for the exemption, particularly lacking details on its business operations and the necessity of a committee, leading to the dismissal of the application.
Contract — Repudiation — Email communication as repudiation of sale agreement — First respondent's email indicating intention to renegotiate material terms of the sale agreement interpreted as repudiation — First appellant entitled to accept repudiation and cancel agreement — Court below erred in finding no repudiation. Facts: The first appellant sold a property to the respondents, subject to two suspensive conditions, both of which were fulfilled. Subsequently, the first respondent sent an email suggesting a reduction in the purchase price and indicating a desire to renegotiate the terms, which the first appellant interpreted as a repudiation of the sale agreement and subsequently cancelled the agreement. Legal issue: Whether the first respondent's email constituted a repudiation of the sale agreement, allowing the first appellant to cancel the agreement. Holding: The court found that the email did constitute a repudiation, validating the first appellant's cancellation of the sale agreement and entitling her to retain the amount paid by the respondents as rouwkoop. The court also upheld the second appellant's appeal regarding costs, stating that the second appellant, as a stakeholder, should not be liable for the costs awarded against it.
Companies — Company name — Confusing similarity to registered trademark — Application by Aspen Pharmacare Holdings Ltd for an administrative order to compel Siyathemba Pharmacare (Pty) Ltd to change its company name — Applicant contending that the name "SIYATHEMBA PHARMACARE" is confusingly similar to its registered trademark "ASPEN PHARMACARE HOLDINGS," falsely implying an association — Tribunal finding that the applicant has established a clear right to the trademark and good cause for the application under section 160 of the Companies Act — First respondent's name deemed to contravene sections 11(2)(b) and (c) of the Companies Act, leading to an order for the first respondent to change its name.
Damages — Pre-judgment interest — Action for damages arising from negligence of the Minister of Correctional Services — Plaintiff contracted tuberculosis while detained in Pollsmoor Prison — Parties settled general damages at R350,000.00, with dispute over pre-judgment mora interest — Court considered the application of the Prescribed Rates of Interest Act 55 of 1975 — Plaintiff entitled to pre-judgment mora interest at 15.5% per annum from 11 December 2012 to 2 March 2026, amounting to R717,734.93 — Total judgment debt of R1,067,734.93, with post-judgment interest at 10.25% per annum from the date of the order.