Judgments

The High Court considered whether a separated issue of liability in a motor vehicle collision matter had been settled between the parties on 3 February 2026. It found that the plaintiff’s email did not correspond with the first defendant’s offer in all material respects and that no compromise was reached. The court ordered that the separated issue of liability was not settled on that date and awarded costs against the plaintiff.

The High Court in Pretoria gave reasons for dismissing an application about condonation under section 2(3) of the Wills Act and the validity of a document dated 19 August 2020. The court said the document did not comply with the formalities for a will, including the presence of two witnesses.

The High Court dealt with an urgent return day application concerning a rule nisi granted ex parte to perfect a general notarial covering bond. It also considered intervention applications by two related companies claiming ownership of attached stock and vehicles, and it extended the rule nisi with a supervised item level verification process.

The High Court in Johannesburg dealt with an application to enforce a restraint of trade clause in an employment contract between a beauty salon and a former employee. The court found the restraint enforceable in part and made an order limiting the restraint to a 20 kilometre radius, with directions about returning confidential records and costs.

The judgment concerns a care and contact dispute between parents over their minor child. The court varied the existing residency, care and contact arrangements and appointed a parent co-ordinator to assist with mediation, directives and the annual contact plan. It also set out detailed arrangements about schooling, contact, therapies and communication.

The Labour Appeal Court considered an appeal about dismissals for operational requirements arising from temporary pay cuts during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court said the employer had achieved its savings target through the pay cuts accepted by almost all employees, and dismissed the appeal.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Another v Bloemfontein Correctional Contracts (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (2023/096157) [2026] ZAGPPHC 886 (12 August 2026).

The High Court gave reasons in an urgent application brought by Ntombizodwa Anna-Maria Ziqubu against Sants Private Higher Education Institution and others. The court said the application was not urgent and dismissed it, noting that a review of the expulsion was already pending in another court.

The judgment concerns an application for leave to appeal after an earlier judgment upheld the respondent’s eviction application. The court summarised the applicant’s complaints, including issues about the Letter of Credit, title deed and alleged fraud, and considered the requirements in section 17 of the Superior Courts Act. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded on an attorney and client scale, including Senior Counsel costs.

The judgment concerns an urgent application about a precautionary suspension imposed by Abbotts High School on a Grade 10 scholar. The court found the matter sufficiently urgent and said the extension of the suspension on 25 February 2026 was procedurally unfair because the second applicant was not afforded a hearing or an opportunity to make representations. The order uplifts the suspension from the end of the current academic term, with no costs order.

The Western Cape High Court gave reasons in a matter between World Focus 226 CC t/a WF Constructions and the City of Cape Town and others. The court dismissed the Part A urgent application and ordered the applicant to pay costs, after finding that clause 4.1 of the addendum did not entitle the applicant to one month’s written notice of the replacement contract date.

The High Court considered an application for leave to appeal against an earlier summary judgment granted in favour of Autoconnect Proprietary Limited for R2 128 312.15 plus costs. The court said it was not persuaded that another court would find that the defendant had disclosed a bona fide defence, and it dismissed the application with costs on the attorney and client scale.

The judgment concerns an urgent application by PSG Wealth Financial Planning to enforce a restraint of trade and to seek interdictory relief against two respondents and a third respondent. The court held that the dispute resolution process in clause 21 of the association agreement was a speedy and adequate alternative remedy, and dismissed the application with costs.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Kriel and Another v Swierstra and Others (2026/072786) [2026] ZAWCHC 402 (11 August 2026).

The judgment concerns an application for leave to appeal against an earlier eviction order made under the PIE Act. The court refused condonation for late filing and dismissed the application for leave to appeal, and ordered costs on the attorney and client scale.

The High Court in Johannesburg considered an application for leave to appeal after earlier granting summary judgment in favour of Global Business Administrators (Pty) Ltd for R12 100 000 plus costs. The judgment says the defendant’s pleaded variation was found to be vague and not fully disclosed, and the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.