|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2022 |
|
|
Appeal court held absolution was wrongly granted and unpleaded reconventional relief improperly awarded; matter remitted for trial continuation.
Civil procedure – absolution from the instance – test for prima facie case; Evidence – credibility findings should not be made before defendant gives evidence; Civil procedure – reconvention – court cannot grant relief not pleaded; Security documents – validity of suretyships and mortgage bonds to be determined at full hearing.
|
25 February 2022 |
|
A court must consider prospects and prejudice, not only delay, before dismissing for want of prosecution.
Civil procedure – dismissal for want of prosecution – court must consider delay and explanation, prospects of success on merits, and balance of convenience/prejudice (Guardforce). Failure to consider all factors is a material misdirection permitting interference on appeal.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
A Labour Officer lacks jurisdiction to conciliate matters already determined internally; ensuing arbitration and court proceedings were set aside.
Labour law – jurisdiction of Labour Officer under s 93 – referral under s 8(6) of National Employment Code – internal disciplinary determination precludes Labour Officer intervention – arbitration and Labour Court proceedings arising from irregular conciliation are invalid – review under s 25(1) Supreme Court Act.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Article 16(3) bars late challenges to jurisdictional rulings; interlocutory awards on prescription are challengeable under Article 34.
Arbitration — Model Law Articles 16(3) and 34 — Distinction between tribunal “ruling” on jurisdiction and “award” — Article 16(3) thirty‑day limit exclusive for jurisdictional rulings — interlocutory/interim awards (prescription) challengeable under Article 34.
|
24 February 2022 |
|
Appeal against striking off rescission application is a nullity without leave; appeal against discharge of provisional interdict is valid (not a consent order).
Civil procedure — Appealability — Consent orders — parties cannot appeal orders made with their consent; Interlocutory orders — leave required under s 43(2)(d) High Court Act; Authority to litigate — absence of board resolution/founding affidavit renders company application a nullity and appeal invalid without leave; Notice of appeal — defective/‘incurably bad’ appeals must be struck off.
|
22 February 2022 |
|
Applicant improperly sought final cancellation of title via urgent provisional application and failed to meet required standards.
Civil procedure – Interdicts – Distinction between provisional (interim) and final orders – Provisional orders preserve status quo on prima facie basis; final orders require proof of clear right – Granting final relief in urgent proceedings exceptional – Framing of relief and alternative interim measures (temporary interdict) – Urgency and locus standi – Protection of innocent purchasers.
|
15 February 2022 |
|
Registrar erred in dismissing the applicant's condonation application for delayed filing of proof of service; service (not the certificate) must be within three days.
Procedure — Review of Registrar’s decision under r 13 — Interpretation of r 43(4) (service within three days) — Distinction between service and filing proof of service — r 39(2) generally applicable; r 43 dominant where conflict — Access to justice and reasonable time for filing certificate of service.
|
9 February 2022 |
|
Appellant may not deduct US$10 million paid on behalf of its holding company; appeal dismissed with costs.
Tax law; deductibility of donations; separate legal entity; indigenisation obligations; expenses incurred by related companies; non-retroactivity of tax amendments; capital v. revenue expenditure.
|
3 February 2022 |
|
An appeal struck off as fatally defective (vague grounds, lack of heads) cannot be reinstated; proper remedy is condonation/fresh appeal.
Civil procedure — Reinstatement of appeal — Rule 70 Supreme Court Rules (2018) — Practice Direction 3/13 para 5 — Struck off the roll — Fatally defective appeal — Vague/prolix grounds of appeal — Condonation and extension as appropriate remedy — Costs on attorney and client scale.
|
1 February 2022 |
|
Condonation refused: High Court lacked statutory power to register trusts; rescission under r449 valid and appeal prospects poor.
Procedural law – chamber/ex parte applications and appeals without a cited respondent; High Court Rules r 449(1)(a) – rescission of orders granted in absence of an affected party; Deeds Registries Act – exclusive statutory power of Registrar of Deeds to register and certify trusts; condonation for late noting of appeal – delay, explanation and prospects of success; capacity of trusts to sue – must be represented by trustee and founding affidavit by trustee.
|
1 February 2022 |
|
Application for condonation and extension dismissed: delay unexplained, prospects weak, and acceptance of terminal benefits amounted to waiver.
Civil procedure – condonation and extension of time to appeal – r 61 Supreme Court Rules – interplay with Prescription Act – conciliation, draft ruling and confirmation under Labour Act – procedural compliance (Isoquant) – waiver by acceptance of terminal benefits.
|
1 February 2022 |
|
Where Labour Court refuses condonation, s92F(3) allows chamber application for leave to appeal, but vague grounds render application a nullity.
Labour law — s92F(2)–(3) Labour Act — leave to appeal to Supreme Court after Labour Court refuses condonation — chamber application to Supreme Court judge; appellate procedure; condonation; defective grounds of appeal; nullity; costs.
|
1 February 2022 |