JamBot Logo
1-100 of about 585 matches for site:www.saflii.org formally supported
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2022/70.html
Faber JT --- "Uncertainty About the Condonation of Formally Non-Compliant Wills, and the Rectification
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2022/6.html
Uncertainty About the Condonation of Formally Non-Compliant Wills, and the Reflection of
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2022/6.html
Uncertainty About the Condonation of Formally Non-Compliant Wills, and the Reflection of
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/ADRY/2015/1.html
settings and in the form of ‘informal care’ which is not formally recognised or supported through
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/ADRY/2015/1.html
settings and in the form of ‘informal care’ which is not formally recognised or supported through
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2001/226.html
the respondents still persists in their stance that the order I gave, (supported by reasons), should be
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2001/85.html
ostensible jurisdiction to deal with the matter, NUMSA, on 12 October 1999, formally referred the dispute
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2003/19.html
may well be that there were matters which were canvassed before the matter was formally recorded, which as I
https://www.saflii.org/na/cases/NALC/2012/29.html
for condonation in accordance with the rules of this court supported by an explanation under
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/1999/192.html
the application came to his attention, to instruct attorneys to formally oppose the review
https://www.saflii.org/na/cases/NALC/2012/29.html
for condonation in accordance with the rules of this court supported by an explanation under
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2013/12.html
to the respondent, the applicant knew on 10 May 2011, when he was formally advised by a
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2013/12.html
to the respondent, the applicant knew on 10 May 2011, when he was formally advised by a
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2002/9.html
by the respondent. 10. According to the evidence by Ms Fresen supported by the evidence
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2008/63.html
the CCMA rules.” [17] It is common cause that the applicant did not formally apply for a
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2013/42.html
the opposed roll.   [5] The plaintiffs proposed notice of amendment was not supported by an affidavit.  Relying
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2013/42.html
the opposed roll.   [5] The plaintiffs proposed notice of amendment was not supported by an affidavit.  Relying
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/60.html
of the Act means a development or approved subdivision that has been formally recognised as such in
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2014/15.html
main application is opposed by the COJ and Tsepo. Although Engen has formally adopted a neutral
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2000/34.html
Oates (“Oates”), the general manager of the footwear division. 6) Nel (supported by the evidence
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECHC/2008/113.html
are received by the Land Use Section within the department, which then formally refers the appeal
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECHC/2008/113.html
are received by the Land Use Section within the department, which then formally refers the appeal
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECMHC/2009/29.html
of time and the version of the defendant, which is supported by an occurrence book
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2007/138.html
the relationship broke down. The evidence of Steenkamp and Sibiya supported this conclusion. Both stated
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECMHC/2012/18.html
interests of justice so required.” At the hearing thereof the appellant formally and on
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2010/27.html
default judgment was granted because it was not notified thereof. It also set out its defence supported by documents as to
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2010/27.html
default judgment was granted because it was not notified thereof. It also set out its defence supported by documents as to
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/1998/125.html
fell under the jurisdiction of a bargaining council. This claim is supported by a letter
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2014/110.html
against the respondent and for the appellant to formally apply for the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2017/17.html
its very nature as employees of a labour broker, the employees formally agreed to be
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2013/26.html
letter the anonymous party made it clear that it did not wish to formally intervene in the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/2017/17.html
its very nature as employees of a labour broker, the employees formally agreed to be
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALAC/1998/27.html
before the application was due to be heard on Friday 28 August, Plascon formally withdrew disciplinary proceedings against
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2013/26.html
letter the anonymous party made it clear that it did not wish to formally intervene in the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2022/15.html
since 2001, prior thereto he lived with his mother’s sister, however the deceased supported and provided
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2014/59.html
purchaser and was, therefore, equally invalid. [24] A passage from Wulfsohn [25] supported this approach. The
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2017/76.html
rebuild consumer confidence and trust in the financial system". [21] It supported the work
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2017/76.html
rebuild consumer confidence and trust in the financial system". [21] It supported the work
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2001/135.html
from the fact that the Respondent saw fit, on 27 November 1998, formally to retract
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACAC/2017/4.html
an "exception" to the complaint referral on six disparate bases. This application was supported by an affidavit, which
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2002/38.html
party’s absence; and (a) ....................... 19.3 The application must be supported by an affidavit. The
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECHC/2008/6.html
the applicant's affidavits justify such an order... Where it is clear that facts, though not formally admitted, cannot be denied
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2004/12.html
while the latter is confined to illegal foreigners who have not yet formally entered South Africa but
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACAC/2017/4.html
an "exception" to the complaint referral on six disparate bases. This application was supported by an affidavit, which
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2005/94.html
accept the withdrawal. It was common cause that none of the Applicants formally recorded in writing
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANCHC/2024/28.html
be referred back to the Board. The applicant’s parole was formally withdrawn on 11 October
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2025/8.html
provision.  Nonetheless, in the written submissions before this Court the Department supported the approach
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2021/13.html
their interpretation. The case is indeed important given that the SCA has supported its reasoning in
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANCHC/2024/28.html
be referred back to the Board. The applicant’s parole was formally withdrawn on 11 October
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2000/152.html
time. In a policy document initiated in November 1995 and formally accepted in October
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2021/13.html
their interpretation. The case is indeed important given that the SCA has supported its reasoning in
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2007/206.html
to the Minister and in which he indicated that he was formally in dispute
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2010/36.html
also informally. The applicant opted to deal with the incidents formally. Evidence before him seemed
https://www.saflii.org/na/cases/NAHC/2000/15.html
only to those persons in the definition clause. This contention is supported by the fact
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2009/108.html
s submissions that many litigants request a stay of arbitration are not supported by any facts other
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2007/17.html
proposing a restructuring of the workplace. On 30 March 2006, Martin was formally advised by the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2008/45.html
affidavit was not accompanied by a condonation application nor did the Respondent formally apply for condonation
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2020/34.html
when the opposition party Mouvement pour l'Evolution Démocratique de l'Afrique Centrale ( MEDAC) was formally prohibited, making the
https://www.saflii.org/na/cases/NAHC/2011/263.html
On 29 th May 2009, the applicant instructed its legal representatives to formally notify the respondents
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/COMPTRI/2019/65.html
to the first respondent using the prescribed methods, the applicant must formally apply for substituted
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2020/34.html
when the opposition party Mouvement pour l'Evolution Démocratique de l'Afrique Centrale ( MEDAC) was formally prohibited, making the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2008/162.html
s rules reads as follows: “(1) The following applications must be brought on notice,supported by affidavit: (a
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2012/40.html
for the World Cup to have their fun. 26 This move was supported by various high profile
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2021/59.html
a matter on my roll, it behoved him to raise the issue formally, and on
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/1997/11.html
sense that it is aimed at ensuring that any agreements that have been reached should be formally recorded and signed
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2012/40.html
for the World Cup to have their fun. 26 This move was supported by various high profile
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2021/2.html
a servitude over Erf 2228 in favour of Victory Investment which was formally registered against the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2021/71.html
that the proprietors of the Tuck Shop also resided therein, an allegation supported by confirmatory affidavits from
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2021/71.html
that the proprietors of the Tuck Shop also resided therein, an allegation supported by confirmatory affidavits from
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2016/87.html
was precluded from doing so on the basis that its plea, even if evidence supported its assertions, would not
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAFSHC/2004/21.html
that of the counsel for the State and I formally confirmed the conviction
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2013/63.html
will only be liable for general damages if the claim is, firstly supported by a serious
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2009/169.html
3. When the proceedings commenced in the High Court, it was formally ordered that the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2023/436.html
version before this court indicates that the plaintiff cannot recall aspects which would have supported his version. It is
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2016/87.html
was precluded from doing so on the basis that its plea, even if evidence supported its assertions, would not
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2005/24.html
Hlanganani. 5.The testimony of both Berger and Stewart was supported by little in
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2013/63.html
will only be liable for general damages if the claim is, firstly supported by a serious
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2009/169.html
3. When the proceedings commenced in the High Court, it was formally ordered that the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2023/436.html
version before this court indicates that the plaintiff cannot recall aspects which would have supported his version. It is
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANWHC/2025/61.html
in good time and, accordingly, on 15 March 2024 the plaintiff formally called on them to
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANWHC/2006/65.html
their request and indicated that if they want a postponement they must formally apply for one
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALC/2005/78.html
all ties with Mr. Mfundisi and Khulisa Terminal Services”. On 14 March 2005 FPT formally awarded the contract
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2017/34.html
opposing party does object, the matter has to be dealt with more formally. [40] In the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2018/37.html
was a Close Corporation until the 15 th March 2017 when it was formally converted to a
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZANWHC/2006/65.html
their request and indicated that if they want a postponement they must formally apply for one
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2017/34.html
opposing party does object, the matter has to be dealt with more formally. [40] In the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAKZDHC/2012/92.html
for a forfeiture of benefits by the Plaintiff. This was formally recorded in the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2018/37.html
was a Close Corporation until the 15 th March 2017 when it was formally converted to a
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2016/22.html
Kleyn of the second respondent was invalid and could not be supported by any law or
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAKZDHC/2012/92.html
for a forfeiture of benefits by the Plaintiff. This was formally recorded in the
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2023/16.html
to the country's conservation estate. [16] These are defined as "areas that are not formally protected by the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2009/18.html
was eventually held on 23 March 2009. [8] At this meeting the First Respondent formally requested the Applicant
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2016/22.html
Kleyn of the second respondent was invalid and could not be supported by any law or
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2022/29.html
to marry and had even discussed having children together. The couple had supported each other – Mr Ruch
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2023/16.html
to the country's conservation estate. [16] These are defined as "areas that are not formally protected by the
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECPEHC/2009/18.html
was eventually held on 23 March 2009. [8] At this meeting the First Respondent formally requested the Applicant
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2022/29.html
to marry and had even discussed having children together. The couple had supported each other – Mr Ruch
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2017/90.html
mogolwane of a particular family group. However, the mogolwane is not formally appointed or even formally
https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAFSHC/2016/112.html
the main sequestration proceedings and has elected also  elected not to formally oppose the IDC
https://www.saflii.org/za/journals/PER/2023/17.html
a legislative framework for environmental sustainability. [97] The NEMA is further supported by subsidiary sector-based