The Pretoria High Court held that a pension fund and its administrator lacked standing to seek the Financial Services Tribunal (FST) to reconsider a determination handed down by the Pension Fund’s Adjudicator’s (Adjudicator) , given that they do not fall within the ambit of “persons aggrieved by a decision” under section 230 of the Financial

The bank brought a claim against the respondent based on a guarantee signed by him wherein he irrevocably and unconditionally guaranteed to pay any amount owing by the close corporation (the debtor) as if he was the principal debtor.

The respondent disputed the sum claimed by the bank in the certificate of balance alleging that

On 29 April 2025, the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) granted approval to the National Transmission Company South Africa (NTCSA) to classify congestion curtailment as a constrained generation ancillary service. NERSA indicated that its decision “represents a significant step toward unlocking grid connection capacity and enhancing energy availability in areas with high

Co-authored by Brigitte Eloff, a candidate attorney.

In June 2025, the Pretoria high court dismissed an application to introduce new evidence relating to a claim for alleged non-compliance with section 45 of the Companies Act, 2008.

The judgment underscores the importance of raising all relevant defences and evidence at first instance, clarifies the limited circumstances

In July 2025 the Gauteng high court set aside a rational November 2022 decision of the Financial Services Tribunal (FST) and declared that an administrative penalty under section 167 of the Financial Sector Regulation Act could be imposed on a foreign person because the administrative penalty had been served on the foreign persons by electronic means