Dear South African Law Reports and Criminal Law Reports subscriber
Herewith the cases in the January 2021 law reports
JUDGMENTS OF INTEREST IN THE JANUARY 2021 EDITIONS OF THE SALR and, SACR. SEE ALSO, FURTHER BELOW, THE TABLE OF CASES FOR THE BOTSWANA LAW REPORTS 2018 (3).
|
|
|
SOUTH AFRICAN LAW REPORTS
Van Meyeren v Cloete redux: no authority for defence of third-party negligence to pauperien claim
Having escaped after intruders broke the lock on front gate, appellant’s his dogs injured a respondent. Can appellant defeat respondent’s pauperien claim with a defence negligent conduct by a non-custodian outsider (the intruders)? In Lever v Purdy 1993 (3) SA 17 (A) the court allowed Lever, a dog owner, to escape liability where the negligence of a man who was looking after his property, had resulted in the Purdy being bitten.
In Van Meyeren v Cloete 2021 (1) SA 59 (SCA) the Supreme Court of Appeal, after an extensive analysis of the common law, concluded that there was no clear authority for such a defence and that it was not in the interest of justice to develop the common law to allow such a defence where the negligent intermediary did not have custody of the animal. The SCA pointed out that the ratio for the actio de pauperie was that it was appropriate for the owner to bear responsibility for the harm caused to an innocent person by its animal, and that, pauperien liability being strict, absence of fault on the part of the owner has never been a basis for avoiding it. The owner was exonerated only where the victim had provoked the animal or where a third party had negligently failed to control and animal in their custody and control. The court ruled that whatever the anthropomorphic concepts underpin pauperien liability, the reality is that animals can cause harm to people and property in various ways. When they do so and the victim of their actions is innocent of fault for the harm they have caused, the interests of justice require that as between the owner and the injured party it is the owner who should be held liable for that harm. People were entitled to walk our streets without having to fear being attacked by dogs and, where such attacks occur, they should in most circumstances be able to look to the owner of the dog for recompense. The SCA accordingly dismissed Van Meyeren’s appeal.
Special needs school refused to readmit addicted child with foetal alcohol syndrome until she was ‘cured’—Okay?
Not okay, said Judge Mathbula of the Free State Division, Bloemfontein in Cassim NO v MEC, Deportment of Social Development, Free State and Others 2021 (1) SA 184 (FS). He pointed out that the school’s argument that it lacked specialists to properly deal with her and that she would put other learners at risk, and would therefore not admit her behaviour improved (she stopped using snuff and alcohol), was untenable. The judge accordingly granted an application by her curator ad litem to compel the school to accept her.
Unfair dismissal on the basis of disability—what about misconduct brought about by depression?
In Legal Aid South Africa v Jansen 2021 (1) SA 245 (LAC) the Labour Appeal Court was confronted by an appeal by an employer who had fired a worker whose admitted misconduct was caused by depression. The court a quo had found the dismissal to have been automatically unfair and ordered reinstatement. The LAC ruled that the worker, Mr Jansen, had failed to show that his conduct was caused by his depression or that he was dismissed for being depressed. The court therefore upheld the employer’s appeal.
SOUTH AFRICAN CRIMINAL LAW REPORTS
Municipal councillor imprisoned for assaulting fellow councillor while council in session
Municipal councillor and leader of the ANC in the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality Council was convicted of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm for hitting the complainant, a DA councillor, over the head with a glass jug filled with water, causing serious injury. A sentence of three years’ imprisonment, of which one year was suspended, was confirmed on appeal. S v Lungisa 2021 (1) SACR 1 (SCA)
Search-and-seizure powers under s 13(7)(c) of South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995, violating right to privacy and unconstitutional
The police cordoned off areas of the Johannesburg inner city and conducted warrantless searches in 11 buildings occupied by some 3000 people. Authorisations were granted by various police commissioners in terms of s 13(7) of the South African Police Services Act 68 of 1995. The applicants challenged both the validity of the authorisations and constitutionally of the provision. The court found that the powers granted under s 13(7)(c) to be overbroad, less restrictive measures existing to achieve the purpose in s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, and the provision unconstitutional. The authorisations themselves were driven by purposes other than ‘the public order’, appeared to have been simply rubber-stamped, and were reviewed and set aside. Residents, Industry House v Minister of Police and Others 2021 (1) SACR 66 (GJ)
Court addressing difficulties presented by court a quo combining offences in verdict
The appellant was charged with two counts: housebreaking with the intent to commit an offence unknown to the state and the attempted rape of a minor female, but the court a quo combined the two offences, convicting the appellant of housebreaking with the intent to rape and attempted rape. He sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment. The court on appeal held that this could not be done, and a verdict should have been pronounced on each of the counts. As to the sentence, although not desirable that counts be taken together for sentence, it was possible, and in the present case, appropriate. The fact, however, that the relevant legislation provided for a person who attempted to commit a sexual offence to receive the same punishment as one who committed the offence, did not mean that the prescribed minimum sentences applicable in such an instance, and the sentence was reduced to 10 years’ imprisonment. S v Lekeka 2021 (1) SACR 106 (FB)
The Juta Law Reports Team
SOUTH AFRICAN LAW REPORTS
TABLE OF CASES
•Telkom SA SOC Ltd v Cape Town City and Another 2021 (1) SA 1 (CC)
• Compcare Wellness Medical Scheme v Registrar of Medical Schemes and Others 2021 (1) SA 15 (SCA)
• Investec Bank Ltd v Erf 436 Elandspoort (Pty) Ltd and Others 2021 (1) SA 28 (SCA)
• Valor IT v Premier, North West Province and Others 2021 (1) SA 42 (SCA)
• Van Meyeren v Cloete 2021 (1) SA 59 (SCA)
• MEC, Western Cape Department of Social Development v BE obo JE and Another 2021 (1) SA 75 (SCA)
• Airports Co SA Ltd v Spain NO and Others 2021 (1) SA 97 (KZD)
• Baleni and Others v Regional Manager, Eastern Cape Department of Mineral Resources and Others 2021 (1) SA 110 (GP)
• Bwanya v The Master and Others 2021 (1) SA 138 (WCC)
• Cassim NO v MEC, Department of Social Development, Free State and Others 2021 (1) SA 184 (FB)
• Denby v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality 2021 (1) SA 190 (GJ)
• Equal Education and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others 2021 (1) SA 198 (GP)
• FirstRand Bank Ltd t/a First National Bank v Moonsammy t/a Synka Liquors 2021 (1) SA 225 (GJ)
• Legal Aid South Africa v Jansen 2021 (1) SA 245 (LAC)
• Munyai v Road Accident Fund and Related Matters 2021 (1) SA 258 (GJ)
• Ruckstuhl and Another v Wakenshaw Estate Home Owners Association 2021 (1) SA 269 (KZD)
• S v LM and Others 2021 (1) SA 285 (GJ)
FLYNOTES
TELKOM SA SOC LTD v CAPE TOWN CITY AND ANOTHER (CC)
JAFTA J, KHAMPEPE J, MADLANGA J, MAJIEDT J, MATHOPO AJ, MHLANTLA J, THERON J and VICTOR AJ
2020 JUNE 25
Telecommunication—Network—Cellphone network—Cellphone mast—Challenge to bylaw requiring rezoning of property in order to erect mast.
COMPCARE WELLNESS MEDICAL SCHEME v REGISTRAR OF MEDICAL SCHEMES AND OTHERS (SCA)
CACHALIA JA, SCHIPPERS JA, PLASKET JA, LEDWABA AJA and MATOJANE AJA
2020 AUGUST 17
Administrative law—Administrative action—Review—Organ of state seeking, in public interest, to review decision of another organ of state—Whether Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 or principle of legality appropriate path to review.
INVESTEC BANK LTD v ERF 436 ELANDSPOORT (PTY) LTD AND OTHERS (SCA)
PETSE DP, SALDULKER JA, DAMBUZA JA, PLASKET JA and POYO-DLWATI AJA
2020 SEPTEMBER 16
Prescription—Extinctive prescription—Interruption—By acknowledgment of liability—Whether series of payments in reduction of loan constituted acknowledgments of liability interrupting prescription—Prescription Act 68 of 1969, s 14.
VALOR IT v PREMIER, NORTH WEST PROVINCE AND OTHERS (SCA)
WALLIS JA, MOLEMELA JA, MOKGOHLOA JA, PLASKET JA and KOEN AJA
2020 JUNE 9
Government procurement—Contract—Unlawful agreement—Provincial government cancelling its own award of contract but later, in response to proceedings brought by other party, settling matter and making settlement order of court—Settlement recording continuance of agreement, which had been entered without open procurement process, and purporting to change character of agreement to bring it in accord with regulations—Thereafter provincial government cancelling agreement for second time—Other party proceeding for declarator that termination unlawful as well as for damages—Provincial government counter-applying to review and set aside agreement’s award—Effect of delay in bringing proceedings to set award aside—Legality of contractual arrangement—Effect of settlement’s attempt to recharacterise agreement—Whether settlement competently made order of court
VAN MEYEREN v CLOETE (SCA)
CACHALIA JA, WALLIS JA, MOCUMIE JA, LEDWABA AJA and WEINER AJA
2020 SEPTEMBER 11
Animal—Actio de pauperie—Defences of owner against liability—Negligence of non-custodian third party resulting in injury to person—Whether defence to be recognised.
MEC, WESTERN CAPE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT v BE obo JE AND ANOTHER (SCA)
PONNAN JA, WALLIS JA, MAKGOKA JA, DLODLO JA and NICHOLLS JA
2020 SEPTEMBER 16
Delict—Liability—Liability of state—Place of care—Place of care in terms of Child Care Act—Child injured when playing on swing in playground—Defective design and construction of swing rendering it dangerous—Whether MEC owing legal duty to children in places of care to take reasonable steps to ensure safety of equipment—Whether MEC liable for damages suffered by injured child—Child Care Act 74 of 1983, s 30(3)(b) and reg 30(4).
AIRPORTS CO SA LTD v SPAIN NO AND OTHERS (KZD)
CHETTY J
2020 SEPTEMBER 1
Company—Business rescue—Business rescue plan—Whether company no longer financially distressed—Court to have regard to actual financial statements of company, not projected income—Companies Act 71 of 2008, s 141(2)(b)(ii).
Company—Business rescue—Business rescue plan—Whether plan substantially implemented—Court to adopt sensible interpretation of documents placed before it without attempting to analyse plan in such detail that scrutiny resulting in plan having no practical effect—Companies Act 71 of 2008, s 152(8).
State—Contracts by—Challenge to validity—Organs of state obliged to challenge own irregular acts by way of direct review or counter-application (collateral challenge)—If they fail to do so they cannot complain that they were being held to unlawful agreement.
State—Finance—Procurement—State-owned enterprise cannot complain that it was being held to unlawful agreement when it has not sought to review it.
BALENI AND OTHERS v REGIONAL MANAGER, EASTERN CAPE DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND OTHERS (GP)
MAKHUBELE J
2020 SEPTEMBER 11
Minerals and petroleum—Mining and prospecting rights—Mining rights—Application—Access to application—Community members living and working on land in respect of which mining rights applied for, having right to access information in such applications—Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002, ss 10(1) and 22(4).
BWANYA v THE MASTER AND OTHERS (WCC)
MAGONA AJ
2020 SEPTEMBER 28
Administration of estates—Intestate succession—‘Spouse’—After ‘spouse’, words ‘or a partner in a permanent opposite-sex life partnership in which the partners had undertaken reciprocal duties of support’ to be read in—Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987, s 1(1).
CASSIM NO v MEC, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, FREE STATE AND OTHERS (FB)
MATHEBULA J
2020 AUGUST 4
Children—Schooling—Right of access to school—School refusing to admit vulnerable child requiring treatment until ‘cured’—Condition discriminatory, unlawful and contrary to ministerial policy—Court ordering, inter alia, that child be admitted to appropriate school.
Education—School—Public school—Special-needs school—Admission policy—School refusing to admit vulnerable child requiring treatment until ‘cured’—Condition discriminatory, unlawful and contrary to ministerial policy—Court ordering, inter alia, that child be admitted to appropriate school.
DENBY v EKURHULENI METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY (GJ)
GILBERT AJ
2020 SEPTEMBER 9
Legal practitioner—Attorney—Rights and duties—Authority—Ostensible authority—Consent to judgment—After merits settled and made order of court, parties’ legal representatives jointly seeking damages order in absence of agreement thereto by defendant—Previous conduct indicating that defendant’s legal representatives had authority to agree to such order—Draft damages order made order of court
EQUAL EDUCATION AND OTHERS v MINISTER OF BASIC EDUCATION AND OTHERS (GP)
POTTERILL ADJP
2020 JULY 17
Education—Right to education—Whether including right to basic nutrition—Constitution, s 29(1)(a).
FIRSTRAND BANK LTD t/a FIRST NATIONAL BANK v MOONSAMMY t/a SYNKA LIQUORS (GJ)
DE VILLIERS AJ
2020 FEBRUARY 27
Credit agreement—Consumer credit agreement—Debt enforcement—Preliminary procedures—Notice of default—Delivery—Failure to deliver notice prior to commencement of proceedings—Effect—Non-compliance cannot be cured by attaching proof of purported compliance to summons or application—Compliance not elective but compulsory—Contrary precedents not followed—National Credit Act 34 of 2005, ss 129, 129(1)(a), 130, 130(4).
LEGAL AID SOUTH AFRICA v JANSEN (LAC)
WAGLAY JP, PHATSHOANE ADJP and MURPHY AJA
2020 JULY 21
Labour law—Dismissal—Fairness—Automatically unfair dismissals—Disability—Depression—Nature of enquiry—Causation must be established—Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, s 187(1)(f).
MUNYAI v ROAD ACCIDENT FUND AND RELATED MATTERS (GJ)
THOMPSON AJ
2020 JUNE 29
Practice—Interlocutory proceedings—Trials interlocutory court, Gauteng divisions—Judge President’s Directive 2 of 2019, part A, items 19 to 25—Abuse of process by practitioners (i) submitting affidavits containing unsubstantiated allegations; and (ii) asking court to prematurely compel other party to discover or to appoint experts within specified time—Proper interpretation of items 20 (succinctness) and 25.5 (failure to secure expert timeously)
RUCKSTUHL AND ANOTHER v WAKENSHAW ESTATE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION (KZD)
OLSEN J
2020 JULY 13
Land—Transfer—Deeds Office—Powers of registrar—Rectification of faulty entry in deeds registry—Deeds Registries Act 47 of 1937, s 4(1).
Land—Transfer—Deeds Office—Faulty entry in registry—Claim for rectification—Requirements—As contrasted with requirements for common-law rectification—Deeds Registries Act 47 of 1937, s 4(1).
Sectional title—Schedule of conditions under which property held—Rectification—Under Deeds Registries Act 47 of 1937, s 4(1).
S v LM AND OTHERS (GJ)
OPPERMAN J and MOKGOATLHENG J
2020 JULY 31
Children—Drug offences by—Use or possession of dagga—Criminalisation unconstitutional—Section 4(b) of Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 inconsistent with Constitution and invalid to extent that it criminalised use or possession of cannabis by child—Pending correction of defects in Act, no child to be arrested, prosecuted or diverted for contravening s 4(b).
Children—Diversion from criminal justice system for minor offences—Programme operating outside of strictures of Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 impermissible.
SOUTH AFRICAN CRIMINAL LAW REPORTS
TABLE OF CASES
• S v Lungisa 2021 (1) SACR 1 (SCA)
• Panday v National Director of Public Prosecutions 2021 (1) SACR 18 (KZP)
• National Commissioner of Police and Another v Gun Owners of South Africa 2021 (1) SACR 44 (SCA)
• Residents, Industry House v Minister of Police and Others 2021 (1) SACR 66 (GJ)
• S v Lekeka 2021 (1) SACR 106 (FB)
S v LUNGISA (SCA)
MAYA P, DAMBUZA JA, NICHOLLS JA, WEINER AJA and MABINDLA-BOQWANA AJA
2020 SEPTEMBER 9
Assault—With intent to do grievous bodily harm—Sentence—Imprisonment—Municipal councillor hitting fellow councillor on head with glass jug filled with water—Victim sustaining serious injuries—Sentence of three years’ imprisonment, of which one year suspended, confirmed on appeal.
PANDAY v NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (KZP)
GORVEN J
2020 AUGUST 14; SEPTEMBER 16
Prosecution—National Director of Public Prosecutions—Decision to prosecute—Review of—Legality review—Whether NDPP had taken decision ‘after consulting’ with DPP—National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998, s 22(2)(c).
Prosecution—National Director of Public Prosecutions—Decision to prosecute—Review of—Rationality review—Contention that NDPP should have waited for intercepted material he had requested before taking decision to prosecute—Sufficient material before NDPP for him to have taken decision.
Words and phrases—‘After consulting’—Meaning of in s 22(2)(c) of National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998.
NATIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANOTHER v GUN OWNERS OF SOUTH AFRICA (SCA)
MAYA P, ZONDI JA, SCHIPPERS JA, PLASKET JA and EKSTEEN AJA
2020 JULY 23
Arms and ammunition—Licensing—Renewal of licence—Interim interdict preventing South African Police Service from applying, implementing and enforcing various provisions of Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000, pending final relief—Set aside on appeal—Requirements for interim interdict not met—Impermissible restraint on exercise of statutory power, violating principle of separation of powers—Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000, ss 24, 27 and 28.
Trial—Presiding officer—Conduct of—Role of judge as neutral arbiter—Judge, of own accord and with applicant’s approval, amending final relief sought—Amounting to descending into arena, was inappropriate and rendered court susceptible to allegation of bias.
RESIDENTS, INDUSTRY HOUSE v MINISTER OF POLICE AND OTHERS (GJ)
MLAMBO JP, MEYER J and KATHREE-SETILOANE J
2020 MARCH 16; JUNE 29
Search and seizure—Search—Without warrant—Validity of—Search conducted in cordoning-off operation authorised under s 13(7) of South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995—Power given to police officers in terms of ss 13(7)(c) constituted violation of right to privacy protected by s 14 of Constitution, was overbroad, and did not pass constitutional muster.
Search and seizure—Search—Without warrant—Validity of—Search conducted in cordoning-off operation authorised under s 13(7) of South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995—Authorisations granted for ulterior motive and invalid.
Words and phrases—‘Public order’—Meaning of in s 13(7) of South African Police Services Act 68 of 1995.
S v LEKEKA (FB)
VAN ZYL J and CHESIWE J
2020 MAY 13
Verdict—Competent verdict—Combination of charges to form one count—Judgment to be pronounced on each of counts charged.
Rape—Attempted rape—Sentence—Prescribed minimum sentence—Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997—Mere fact, that s 55 of Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 provided that person who attempted to commit sexual offence in terms of Act may be liable to punishment to which person convicted of actually committing offence would be liable, could not be interpreted to mean that prescribed minimum sentences in Act 105 of 1997 applicable in such instance.
TABLE OF CASES
• A to L Cab Hire v Classic Drop (Pty) Ltd and Others; In Re: A to L Cab Hire v Classic Drop (Pty) Ltd And Others [2018] 3 BLR 301 (HC)
• African Banking Corporation of Botswana Ltd v Filtration Botswana (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 334 (HC)
• Attorney-General and Others v Bopadile [2018] 3 BLR 502 (CA)
• Bayport Financial Services (Pty) Ltd v Mmolawa [2018] 3 BLR 498 (CA)
• Bifang v The State [2018] 3 BLR 172 (CA)
• Boalotswe v Health Professions Council and Another [2018] 3 BLR 175 (CA)
• Bokole v Bank ABC [2018] 3 BLR 232 (IC)
• Bondo v The State [2018] 3 BLR 457 (CA)
• Botho University v Matthews [2018] 3 BLR 485 (CA)
• Botswana Defence Force and Others v Phaladze [2018] 3 BLR 431 (CA)
• Botswana Land Board & Local Authorities & Health Workers' Union and Others, Director of
• Botswana Public Employees Union and Others v Mogwera and Others, (CA) [2018] 3 BLR 303 (HC)
• Botswana Transport and Allied Workers Union v Warehousing Services [2018] 3 BLR 284 (IC)
• Brown Khata & Sons Express (Pty) Ltd v Thebe and Others [2018] 3 BLR 435 (CA)
• Brown v The State [2018] 3 BLR 180 (CA)
• Chamile v Choppies Ltd Human Resources Centre [2018] 3 BLR 517 (IC)
• China Railway Seventh Group v Selepeng [2018] 3 BLR 184 (CA)
• Chivasera v Citizen Entrepreneurial Development Agency [2018] 3 BLR 217 (IC)
• City Active Life & Fitness Studios (Pty) Ltd v Water Utilities Corporation [2018] 3 BLR 248 (CA)
• Clearwater (Pty) Ltd and Another v Kefentse [2018] 3 BLR 543 (CA)
• Director of Public Service Management and Others v Botswana Land Board & Local Authorities & Health Workers' Union and Others [2018] 3 BLR 251 (CA)
• Ditlhong v Registrar and Master of The High Court and Others [2018] 3 BLR 505 (CA)
• Dixon-Warren NO v Attorney-General [2018] 3 BLR 555 (CA)
• Dixon-Warren NO v Phakalane Estates (Pty) Ltd and Another [2018] 3 BLR 158 (CA)
• Elsamex-INTL JVCA v Abdulla NO and Another [2018] 3 BLR 139 (CA)
• Fedics Botswana (Pty) Ltd v Rankokwane and Others; In Re: Rankokwane and Others v Fedics Botswana (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 13 (IC)
• Feedmaster (Pty) Ltd v Tabaliah Traders (Pty) Ltd and Others [2018] 3 BLR 329 (HC)
• Gabakalelwe v The State [2018] 3 BLR 168 (CA)
• Gaetsewe v The Registrar and Taxing Master, Court of Appeal and Another [2018] 3 BLR 262 (CA)
• Galium (Pty) Ltd v C to C Holdings (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 411 (HC)
• Garebamono v Attorney-General and Others [2018] 3 BLR 590 (HC)
• Harbour and Another v Fourie [2018] 3 BLR 276 (CA)
• Holonga v Civil Aviation Authority of Botswana and Another [2018] 3 BLR 441 (CA)
• Ikitseng v Attorney-General and Others [2018] 3 BLR 259 (CA)
• Intertyre (Pty) Ltd t/a Absolute Sign Manufacturers (A-Sign-M) v Eco-Connect Plus (Pty) Ltd and Others [2018] 3 BLR 67 (HC)
• Italtswana Construction Company (Pty) Ltd v Debswana Diamond Company (Pty) Ltd and Another [2018] 3 BLR 43 (CA)
• James and Others v Civil Aviation Authority of Botswana [2018] 3 BLR 400 (IC)
• JNG Express (Pty) Ltd v Baithuti Holdings Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 307 (HC)
• Kamodi and Another v First National Bank Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 491 (CA)
• Kanani v Chairperson of Ghanzi District Youth Sport and Culture Office Disciplinary Hearing and Others [2018] 3 BLR 512 (HC)
• Kepaletswe and Another v Tamukathe [2018] 3 BLR 446 (CA)
• Kuzipa v Derek Brink Holdings (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 576 (IC)
• Kwada v Rainville Maintenance & Construction (Pty) Ltd and Others; In Re: Kwada v Rainville Maintenance & Construction (Pty) Ltd and Others [2018] 3 BLR 239 (HC)
• Kweneng District Council v Estate Construction (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 80 (CA)
• Law Society of Botswana v Madandume and Another [2018] 3 BLR 373 (HC)
• Leburu v Attorney-General and Others [2018] 3 BLR 322 (HC)
• Lesetedi v Shield Security and Another [2018] 3 BLR 21 (IC)
• Letshwiti v Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, Skills & Development and Others [2018] 3 BLR 151 (CA)
• Magogodi and Another v Kgatleng Land Board [2018] 3 BLR 508 (IC)
• Malachite Holdings (Pty) Ltd t/a Communication Link and Another v Carragreen Investments (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 480 (CA)
• Mamasi Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others v African Banking Corporation t/a Bank ABC [2018] 3 BLR 189 (CA)
• Marman v Dragan Craft and Another [2018] 3 BLR 31 (IC)
• Maroba Phuti Enterprises (Pty) Ltd and Another v Tram Holdings (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 117 (CA)
• Matsipane v Mokgatitswane [2018] 3 BLR 314 (HC)
• Mmereki v Attorney-General [2018] 3 BLR 449 (CA)
• Modisane and Others v Mogwera and Others [2018] 3 BLR 359 (HC)
• Mogotswana v The State [2018] 3 BLR 546 (CA)
• Molatlhegi v Pharma Vision (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 425 (IC)
• Moloi v Naledi Motors (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 203 (HC)
• Mompati v Botswana Postal Services t/a Botswana Post and Others [2018] 3 BLR 281 (CA)
• Mosala and Another v Commander, Botswana Defence Force and Others [2018] 3 BLR 296 (HC)
• Mosienyane & Partners International (Pty) Ltd v Smart Partnership Enterprises (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 65 (HC)
• Mosothwane v The State [2018] 3 BLR 74 (CA)
• Motsamai v The State [2018] 3 BLR 35 (CA)
• Moyo v Attorney-General and Another [2018] 3 BLR 369 (HC)
• Mpotoke and Another v China Railway Seventh Group [2018] 3 BLR 407 (IC)
• Muchauza v The State [2018] 3 BLR 551 (CA)
• Newdico (Pty) Ltd v Deloitte Advisory Services and Others [2018] 3 BLR 55 (HC)
• Non-Bank Financial Institutions Regulatory Authority and Another v Capital Management Botswana (Pty) Ltd and Others [2018] 3 BLR 87 (CA)
• Ntuane v Standard Chartered Bank [2018] 3 BLR 17 (IC)
• Nyeku v Maswela [2018] 3 BLR 122 (CA)
• Okgethile v Kgabenyane [2018] 3 BLR 471 (CA)
• Ramaretlwa and Others v Mogwera and Another [2018] 3 BLR 563 (HC)
• Rebeetsweng v Debswana Diamond Company (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 72 (HC)
• Reotsweleng v The State [2018] 3 BLR 533 (CA)
• Seabelo v Botswana Railways [2018] 3 BLR 578 (IC)
• Sebina v Attorney-General [2018] 3 BLR 319 (HC)
• Selema v Distance Education College and Another [2018] 3 BLR 290 (IC)
• Sello v The State [2018] 3 BLR 255 (CA)
• Sempape v Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Transport and Communications and Others [2018] 3 BLR 208 (IC)
• Setume v Setume (Nee Madande); In Re: Setume (Nee Madande) v Setume [2018] 3 BLR 199 (HC)
• Sibanda v Shampeng [2018] 3 BLR 1 (IC)
• Simane v Dinoge Syndicate and Another [2018] 3 BLR 24 (CA)
• Solo (Nee Molamu) v Solo [2018] 3 BLR 6 (CA)
• State v Chaka [2018] 3 BLR 419 (HC)
• State v Ndaba [2018] 3 BLR 49 (HC)
• Systems & Services Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Botswana Unified Revenue Service [2018] 3 BLR 607 (CA)
• Tati Company Ltd v North East District Council and Another [2018] 3 BLR 535 (CA)
• Thabakgolo v Merafe and Others [2018] 3 BLR 475 (CA)
• Thebeng v Shoprite Checkers Botswana [2018] 3 BLR 421 (IC)
• Tours of Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another v First National Bank of Botswana Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 272 (CA)
• Tswaipe v Botswana Public Employees Union [2018] 3 BLR 341 (IC)
• Tumisang v Shoppers Supermarket [2018] 3 BLR 561 (IC)
• United Filling Station (Pty) Ltd v Cycle Mart Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another [2018] 3 BLR 459 (CA)
• Warehousing Services, Botswana Transport and Allied Workers Union v, (IC) [2018] 3 BLR 284 (HC)
• Wess Security and Another v Kelapile and Others [2018] 3 BLR 268 (CA)
• Your Friend (Pty) Ltd and Another v Time Projects (Botswana) (Pty) Ltd [2018] 3 BLR 127 (CA)
• Zion Christian Church and Another v Tladi and Others [2018] 3 BLR 193 (CA)
• Zivuku v The State [2018] 3 BLR 264 (CA)
NEW RELEASES FROM JUTA
|
|
