Judgments

The judgment concerns an application by the Premier of the North West Province to rescind an order granted on 8 December 2021. The court records that the application was framed under Rule 42(1)(a) and says the applicant did not show absence or error on the papers, and the application was dismissed with costs.

This judgment concerns an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The court says the application was procedurally fatally flawed because the Full Court cannot give leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, and it dismissed the application with costs.

The Western Cape High Court dealt with an urgent Part A application by Lightmap (Pty) Ltd, a minority shareholder in Cybersmart (Pty) Ltd, seeking interim relief about a proposed hosting division disposal to Host Africa and the unwinding of the Hexion joint venture. The court found the matter urgent and ordered that the first and second respondents be interdicted from taking further steps in relation to those transactions pending Part B. It also ordered that costs stand over for determination by the court hearing Part B.

The Supreme Court of Appeal dealt with an application for reconsideration under section 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act in a dispute involving Silverbirch Estate Homeowners' Association and the CIPC records of directors. The judgment records that Ms Fisher, Snr had resigned as a director before the petition order was handed down, and the court struck the reconsideration application from the roll with costs, save for a costs order about condonation. The judgment also discusses the binding effect of earlier cases on reconsideration applications and the court's view that the jurisdictional threshold was not met.

The Supreme Court of Appeal considered whether a lease of immovable property concluded with a juristic person was void under provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, or contrary to public policy. It held that section 51 did not apply to extra contractual requirements and that the lease with the incorporated entity was valid. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Fino Investments (Pty) Ltd v Nisela Financial Services (Pty) Limited and Another (2024/036920) [2026] ZAGPJHC 499 (13 May 2026).

The judgment concerns an application to enforce a divorce settlement term about a motor vehicle finance agreement. The court interpreted the phrase "until the expiry of the finance agreement" to include the final balloon instalment and granted a writ of execution for 50% of that amount. Costs were also awarded.

The High Court considered an application for leave to appeal against its earlier dismissal of a review concerning decisions of the South African Reserve Bank and related respondents. The court said the appeal grounds did not show a reasonable prospect of success or another compelling reason to hear the appeal, and it dismissed the application with costs.

The judgment concerns a Rule 53 review brought by a Parliament employee about a Public Service Commission report into personnel practices following the suicide of a parliamentary manager. The court held that the application was moot, the delay in bringing it was unreasonable, and the report was not a reviewable decision because its recommendations were non-binding.

The judgment concerns a costs dispute after the parties settled the substantive issues in a matter against the Road Accident Fund. The court recorded that the applicant had sought an order compelling the Fund to make a decision under regulation 3(3)(dA) in relation to a RAF 4 serious injury assessment report, and ordered costs on the attorney and client scale with counsel’s costs on Scale A.

The Western Cape High Court dealt with a dispute about money from the sale of property in a deceased estate. The court found that Winston must pay R322 600 to the executrix and that Winston and Liesell must pay R25 090.90 in relation to transfer and bond costs. Interest was ordered at the prescribed rate from the date of the order.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Fourie NO and Others v Big D Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (075603/2024) [2026] ZAGPJHC 515 (13 May 2026).

The Western Cape High Court heard an appeal against sentence in De Bruyn v S. The appellant had been convicted in the regional court of murder and defeating the ends of justice, and the appeal against the 25 year sentence for murder was dismissed.

The Supreme Court of Appeal dealt with an appeal against a sentence for two counts of rape, including an application to admit further evidence about the appellant’s HIV status. The Court accepted the further evidence, upheld the appeal, and replaced the life sentence on count 1 with 15 years’ imprisonment, with part to run concurrently with the sentence on count 2.

The High Court dealt with an urgent application by Ms Mokhondo against Eskom about the restoration of electricity supply to her home in Hammanskraal. The court found that the matter was not urgent and struck the application from the urgent roll. It ordered that each party pay its own costs.

The Western Cape High Court dealt with an eviction application brought by the registered owner of a property in Belle Constantia. The court recorded that the respondents had raised several defences, including a lease, an earlier SCA-related order, and a pending rescission application, but found those points did not provide a defence on the papers. The court granted eviction, set a vacate date of 31 July 2026, and ordered costs against the first to fifth respondents.