Judgments

The Western Cape High Court heard an appeal in Troskie v S and dismissed the appellant’s appeal against convictions on two counts of assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The court confirmed the convictions and the resultant sentence.

The High Court dealt with an application by Indluplace Properties Limited against the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality about an unresolved account dispute. The court said the City had not given a decision on the complaint and ordered it to provide its resolution in writing within 14 calendar days. The judgment also dealt with the pleadings, the City’s defences, and costs.

The High Court considered an application by ASI Capital for security for costs in an action brought by TMS Pro Property Management. It ordered TMS to furnish security, with the form, amount and manner to be determined by the Registrar, and stayed the action pending that security being furnished.

The appeal concerned responsibility for repair and replacement of a prepaid water meter in a sectional title scheme. The court said rule 29(4), not rule 29(3), governed the prepaid meter and that the appellant had not shown a legal basis for the body corporate to bear the claimed costs. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

The High Court dealt with an application for summary judgment by Sapor Rentals against Telco Group and Mr Preston Moodley arising from alleged fraudulent church transactions under a Supplier Agreement. The judgment sets out the disputed warranties, the guarantee, and the parties’ competing versions about authority, ratification and the amount claimed. Summary judgment was refused and the defendants were granted leave to defend.

The High Court considered an application for leave to appeal against its earlier order staying the main action and referring the disputes to arbitration under section 6 of the Arbitration Act. The court said the application raised numerous grounds, but was not persuaded that another court would likely reach a different conclusion. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed, with costs on scale C.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Phaahla v National Council for Correctional Services and Others (2023-011042) [2026] ZAGPPHC 994 (28 August 2026).

The judgment concerns a medical negligence claim about a left total hip replacement at Tygerberg Hospital and a later partial sciatic nerve injury. The court dealt with liability only, after merits and quantum had been separated, and noted conflicting expert evidence about the cause of the injury and whether further investigation or revision surgery would have helped. The claim was dismissed with costs.

The High Court in Pretoria dealt with an application for leave to appeal in a matter involving the Roux Shabangu Family trust and the Commissioner of the South African Revenue Services. The judgment records that the application was dismissed with costs on scale C.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Tshepi Metallics Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (2025-026729) [2026] ZAGPPHC 993 (28 August 2026).

This is a Rule 43 application in the Gauteng Division, Pretoria concerning interim care, contact, maintenance and related arrangements pending divorce proceedings. The court recorded that the parties have three minor children and set out orders about residence, contact, maintenance, legal costs, evaluations and counselling.

The Western Cape High Court refused leave to appeal in an application brought by the uMkhonto Wesizwe Party and United Africans Transformation against an interim interdict linked to a s 89 impeachment enquiry. The court said the order would likely lapse before any appeal could be heard and that the requirements in s 17(1)(b) and (c) of the Superior Courts Act were not met.

SAFlii has listed this judgment: Schoeman v Evexia Day Inc and Another (232321/2025) [2026] ZAGPPHC 995 (28 August 2026).

The High Court considered an application for leave to appeal in a dispute between AME Telecommunications and Zamori Engineering Services. The Court said the application mainly sought reconsideration of factual findings, credibility assessments and probabilities, and dismissed the application. It also ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the leave application, including senior counsel on the party and party Scale C.

The judgment concerns an opposed interlocutory application in which Rautenbach sought to intervene in pending default judgment proceedings brought by Discount Board Specialists Group against Potgieter. The court dismissed the intervention application, granted condonation to proceed with it, and ordered Rautenbach to pay costs on an attorney and client scale.

The High Court considered an appeal by a homeowners’ association about whether its rules allowed it to require a resident to remove synthetic grass outside his home. The court held that the governing documents did not clearly authorise that relief and dismissed the appeal. The court also granted condonation for the late filing of the appeal and made no order as to costs.