SA Taxi Finance Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Mokobi (2021/12537)
|
[2023] ZAGPJHC 751
|
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
|
South Africa
|
30 Jun 2023
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
LawCite Minister of Health v Solidarity Trade Union
|
[2023] ZAGPPHC 989
|
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
|
South Africa
|
14 Jun 2023
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Minister of Health v Solidarity Trade Union (61844/21)
|
[2023] ZAGPPHC 459
|
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
|
South Africa
|
14 Jun 2023
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
TNC Mining (Pty) Ltd v Mathome Training Development (Pty) Ltd (424/2019)
|
[2022] ZANCHC 82
|
High Court of South Africa - Northern Cape Division
|
South Africa
|
9 Dec 2022
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Lemaku v Simunye (1887/2022)
|
[2022] ZAFSHC 114
|
High Court of South Africa - Free State Division
|
South Africa
|
25 May 2022
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Nala Local Municipality v Van Heerden (4375/2021)
|
[2021] ZAFSHC 318
|
High Court of South Africa - Free State Division
|
South Africa
|
1 Dec 2021
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
LawCite Ntefang v Seeletso (M180/2021)
|
[2021] ZANWHC 77
|
High Court of South Africa - North-West Division
|
South Africa
|
18 Nov 2021
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
M v Magudulela (2019/26963)
|
[2021] ZAGPJHC 510
|
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
|
South Africa
|
28 Sep 2021
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Qubeka v Firstrand Bank Ltd t/a Wesbank In Re: Firstrand Bank Ltd t/a Wesbank v Qubeka (2019 / 23591)
|
[2021] ZAGPJHC 658
|
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
|
South Africa
|
16 Aug 2021
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
CT v MT (10825/14)
|
[2020] ZAWCHC 2; 2020 3 SA 409
|
High Court of South Africa - Western Cape Division
|
South Africa
|
29 Jan 2020
|
SAFLII
|
|
3
|
Akshardham (Pty) Ltd v JSR 108 Investments CC (3128/17)
|
[2019] ZAGPJHC 323
|
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
|
South Africa
|
16 Sep 2019
|
SAFLII
|
|
2
|
Sacerdote v Stromberg (34218/18)
|
[2019] ZAGPPHC 114
|
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
|
South Africa
|
27 Feb 2019
|
SAFLII
|
|
1
|
Jaw v GSMW (3145/2015)
|
[2017] ZAECPEHC 39
|
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
|
South Africa
|
22 Aug 2017
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Mtshali v Masawi
|
[2016] ZAGPJHC 291; 2017 4 SA 632
|
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
|
South Africa
|
9 Nov 2016
|
SAFLII
|
|
3
|
Purpose of rule 4 is to provide for a mechanism by which relative certainty can be obtained that service has been effected upon a defendant If certain minimum standards are complied with as set out in the rule, then the assumption is made that the service was sufficient to reach the defendant's attention and his failure to take steps is not due to the fact that he does not have knowledge of the summons The converse is not true — namely that if service is not effected as required by the rule, the service is not effective — in that the purpose for which service is required was fulfilled, namely the defendant came to know of the summons The rules, as was pointed out by Roux J in United Reflective Converters (Pty) Ltd v Levine, 1
|
988 SA 460
|
|
South Africa
|
10 May 2016
|
LexisNexis
|
|
2
|
Standard Bank Namibia Ltd v Maletzky (SA 15/2013)
|
[2015] NASC 12
|
Supreme Court of Namibia
|
Namibia
|
24 Jun 2015
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Concrete 2000 (Pty) Ltd v Lorenzo Builders CC t/a Creative Designs (12337/2009)
|
[2014] ZAKZPHC 6
|
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
|
South Africa
|
14 Feb 2014
|
SAFLII
|
|
|
Concrete 2000 (Pty) Ltd v Lorenzo Builders CC t/a Creative Designs (12337/2009)
|
[2014] ZAKZDHC 4; [2014] 2 All SA 81
|
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
|
South Africa - Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
|
14 Feb 2014
|
SAFLII
|
|
4
|