BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY In 1999, two sisters created an inter vivos trust known as the Arathusa Family Trust (the “Trust”). The Trust is the sole shareholder of a company called Manyeleti (Pty) Ltd (the company), which owns a farm that is part of a game reserve. The three trustees appointed in terms of the trust
SUMMARY The Respondent, Mr Halstead-Cleak, came into contact with a low hanging power line whilst cycling. He suffered electrical burns as a result. At the time of the incident, the power line was not supplying or required to supply electricity to anyone. However, after sustaining severe electrical burns, the Respondent issued a summons against Eskom
BACKGROUND The Appellant, an accountant by profession, was convicted in the Nelspruit Regional Court on 20 counts of fraud relating to false VAT claims made to the South African Revenue Service and was subsequently sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment, wholly suspended on certain conditions for a period of five years. The Appellant petitioned the Gauteng
SUMMARY The appellant is PepsiCo Inc (Pepsi), the registered proprietor of trademark PEPSI. The respondent is Atlantic Industries (Atlantic), a subsidiary of The Coca-Cola Company and the registered proprietor of trademarks TWIST, LEMON TWIST and DIET TWIST.  Both parties’ trademarks are registered in class 32 which includes ‘mineral and aerated waters and other non-alcoholic drinks’.
BACKGROUND Mantis Investment Holdings Pty (Ltd) (the “Appellant”) was the sole shareholder of Bushman Sands Development (Pty) Ltd (“Bushman Sands”). Bushman Sands borrowed the sum of R19 357 645.00 (Nineteen Million, Three Hundred and Fifty-Seven Thousand, Six Hundred and Forty-Five Rand) from the Eastern Cape Development Corporation (the “First Respondent”). Before the First Respondent could
BACKGROUND In this matter, an eviction order of the KwaZulu-Natal Division, Pietermaritzburg (the “Court a Quo”) was granted against John Walker Pools (Pty) Ltd (“JWP”). In terms of the eviction order JWP were to be ejected from occupying the shop premises. The Court a Quo dismissed JWP’s application for leave to appeal. Subsequently, the application