The Constitutional Court’s unanimous April 2025 judgment in Prithilal v Akani Egoli (Pty) Ltd and Another restates the narrow circumstances in which a court may depart from the ordinary party‑and‑party scale and award costs on the punitive attorney‑and‑client scale. Ms Prithilal, although successful in joining Akani to her delictual action, had been ordered by the
This blog is co-authored by Justine Subramoney, a candidate attorney.
A Company’s Memorandum of Incorporation or MOI is its most important document. However, section 15 of the Companies Act provided that an MOI must be consistent with the Act and any clause that is not will be void to the extent it is not. In
This blog was co-authored by: Caitlin Gardiner, Candidate Attorney
In this case, the Claimant sued for damages, alleging that the hospital staff’s negligence during her labour resulted in her child’s cerebral palsy. The Supreme Court of Appeal found that no adverse inference should be drawn because the hospital records are missing. Nor could any
Bad grammar does not necessarily render a contract ambiguous.
That was the sensible conclusion of this United States judgment.
Hall sued her former employer, Rag-O-Rama when it fired her less than a year after promoting her to an area-manager position. A poorly drafted sentence in the employment contract recorded:
“Hall is reminded of the
The Supreme Court of Appeal, in Pelham Stephanus Bothma and Others v Tertius Bothma N.O and Another (Case number 748/2019) [2021] ZASCA 46 (15 April 2021), re-affirmed the position regarding the interpretation of legal documents, re-stating the principle that only admissible evidence of context, conservatively applied, may be led in resolving an interpretation dispute.
The
In June 2021 the High Court of Australia held that a clause in a business interruption policy that excluded diseases that were “declared to be quarantinable diseases under the Quarantine Act, 1908 and subsequent amendments” did not include diseases quarantinable under the Biosecurity Act, 2015 which had repealed and replaced the 1908 Act.
The insurers
The July 2021 Supreme Court of Appeal judgment in Capitec Bank Holdings Limited v Coral Lagoon Investments 194 (Pty) Ltd and Others (10530/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 65, deferred to the Constitutional Court in Beadica 231 CC and Others v Trustees, Oregon Trust and Others [2020] ZACC 13; 2020 (5) SA 247 (CC) which authoratively dealt with
The dispute arose under a settlement agreement in obliging the defendants to deliver 100 000 cubic metres of “clean sand (top soil excluded)” which was “stockpiled”. It was not clean sand nor properly stockpiled and yielded only two thirds of the amount of clean sand, leading to a large damages claim. The Supreme Court