In a January 2025 judgment the High Court offers a stark reminder of the ethical obligations that underpin legal practice when placing information before a court. What began as a routine application for leave to appeal escalated into a significant cautionary tale, culminating in a referral of the legal practitioners to the Legal Practice Council
Tristan Marot
Requirements for an application to dismiss a claim for want of prosecution
By Tristan Marot on
In a December 2024 judgment, the High Court discusses the requirements for a successful application to dismiss a claim due to want of prosecution.
Quoting from the 2014 SCA judgement in Cassimjee v Minister of Finance there are three primary requirements that must be met:
“First, there should be a delay in the prosecution of…
Expert Evidence of Collision, Reasonable Care and Dishonesty?
By Tristan Marot on
In an October 2024 judgement, the Pretoria High Court examined the rejection of an insurance claim following a motor vehicle accident. On 26 December 2016, the claimant was driving his insured sports car when he collided with a wall. He filed a claim with his insurer, which was rejected on the grounds that he had…
Company is liable for Chatbot Miscommunications holds Canadian Tribunal
By Tristan Marot on
The Canadian case of Moffatt v. Air Canada considers a dispute concerning a refund for a bereavement fare. Jake Moffatt, the applicant, booked flights with Air Canada following the death of his grandmother. He was informed by an AI powered chatbot on Air Canada’s website that he could apply for bereavement fares retroactively. However, when…
An Acknowledgement of liability to third party interrupts prescription
By Tristan Marot on
The Free State High Court confirms in J.H.V v Centlec (SOC) Ltd and Others that an acknowledgement of liability by the debtor interrupts prescription, even if the acknowledgement is not made directly to the creditor.
The applicant approached the High Court for a declaratory order that he was not indebted to Centlec SOC Ltd, the municipal electricity…
AI Cannot be an Inventor says Supreme Court (UK)
By Tristan Marot on
In December 2023, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom held that an AI cannot be an inventor under the UK Patents Act of 1977, and accordingly patents cannot be granted for inventions derived by AI.
Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents Designs and Trade Marks, considers Dr. Stephen Thaler’s applications for patents for…