Case summary written by Elani Vogel and checked by Stefan Bezuidenhout 27 October 2020 BACKGROUND The University of Pretoria Law Clinic (“the Appellant”), among others, brought an application challenging the constitutional validity of section 10 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act (“the Act”) in the Court a quo, which application was dismissed in a

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CA 319/2018

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 6986/2017

Case summary written by Lindokuhle Mashilo and checked by Kirsten Chetty 27 October 2020 BACKGROUND This case concerns the decision of the Pretoria High Court (“court a quo”) to rescind and set aside a default judgment and sale of immoveable property in execution of a judgment debt, due to inadequate compliance with Rule 42(1)(a) of

By Chantelle Gladwin-Wood, Partner, Maike Gohl, Partner and Lauren Squier, Associate 23 October 2020 Introduction The City of Johannesburg’s (“COJ”) 2018 Supplementary 2 Valuation Roll (“2018 Supplementary 2 GV”) was released for public inspection and comment on 21 October 2020. It will remain open for inspection and objection until 4 December 2020 It is avialable

Case summary written by Sean Buskin and checked by Danmari Duguid 22 October 2020 Background In this matter, the Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (“the Applicant”) launched an application in terms of Rule 4(2) of the Uniform Rules of Court, requesting substituted service of a notice in terms of section 129(1)(a) of the National

By Lisa Schmidt (Associate), Kirsten Chetty (Associate) andWade Jacobs (Candidate Attorney) Taking legal action: initiating process Recovering outstanding amounts can be done effectively through various debt collection mechanisms. Drafting and dispatching a letter of demand has become a prerequisite to any debt collection proceeding. A letter of demand not only sets out the basis of

Case summary written by Dean Scher and checked Ayanda Katjitae 13 October 2020 Background The focus of the judgment is whether the Court has jurisdiction to make an order based upon the agreement of the parties’ legal representatives, where one of the parties had not agreed to the order. Mr Mark Gary Denby, (“the Plaintiff”)

Case summary written by Angela Paschalides and checked by Michal Asoulin and Charlotte Clarke 20 October 2020 Background The High Court of Justice of England and Wales (Commercial Court, Queen’s Bench Division) (the “Court”) heard a case wherein pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 39.3 (“CPR 39.3”), F Whale Corporation (the “First Defendant”) and TMT Co,