Explore 38 related cases • Click to navigate
Cited for the principle that a court may mero motu raise a question of law that emerges fully from the evidence provided no prejudice will be caused to any…
Cited for the meaning of occupation for the purposes of the PIE Act, which is inconsistent with the court below's conclusion.
Cited for the principle that a court may mero motu raise a question of law that emerges fully from the evidence provided no prejudice will be caused to any…
Cited for the principle that a court may mero motu raise a question of law that emerges fully from the evidence provided no prejudice will be caused to any…
Cited as the Constitutional Court's authoritative exposition of the nature of the mandament van spolie and endorsement of earlier SCA judgments.
Cited for the principle that the parties define the nature of their dispute in pleadings or affidavits and the court adjudicates upon those issues.
Cited in support of the nature and purpose of the mandament van spolie.
The high court stated it was cognisant of Fischer, which held that courts should not determine applications on legal points not emerging from papers and not…
Cited for the principle that the Court may not decide on matters not properly before it; affirmed by the Constitutional Court in Public Protector v South…
Cited for the principle that the court will not allow introduction of new matter amounting to abandonment and substitution of a fresh claim based on a…
Cited to establish the limits within which a court may exercise discretion in motion proceedings, particularly that a court may not mero motu raise a new issue…
Court applies the principle from this case that in our adversarial system it is for the parties to define the issues and for the court to decide only those…
Cited to reaffirm that land invasion is itself an act of spoliation, and that the Constitutional Court has confirmed that the mandament van spolie supports the…
The concurring judgment applies the principle from this case that parties must set out and define the nature of their case in the pleadings or affidavits, and…
Cited at paragraphs 13-14 for the principle that no court may mero motu in chambers deal with matters not properly placed before it.
Applied for the principle that it is for the parties in civil litigation, and not the court, to define the nature of their dispute; a court may not raise new…
Applied for the principle that in an adversarial system it is for the parties to set out and define the nature of their dispute and it is for the court to…
The court applied the rule that a court cannot raise new issues not traversed in pleadings or affidavits.
Applied to explain the nature of civil litigation in the adversarial system, that parties must frame the issues and the court must adjudicate only on those…
Cited to emphasise that the function of judicial officers is to determine the issues before them as set out by the parties in the pleadings.
Cited for the principle that findings should only be made on proven facts and that it is impermissible to make findings where there are disputes of fact based…
Cited for the principle that it is for the parties to define the nature of their dispute and it is for the court to adjudicate upon those issues.
Considered in the context of the Supreme Court of Appeal remitting the case to the High Court for the hearing of oral evidence without deciding the issue of…
Cited for the principle that a court misdirects itself by deciding a matter on the basis of points that had not been raised by any of the parties.
Applied for the principle that it is impermissible for a court to raise a legal point mero motu that was not raised by the parties.
Applied for the principle that it is not sufficient to raise a constitutional issue only in heads of argument without laying a proper foundation in papers or…
Court applies the principle that in civil litigation in the adversarial system it is for the parties to set out and define the nature of their dispute and for…
Cited for the principle that courts should not anticipate doctrines whose birth is distant and that parties know their cases better than the courts.
Cited in support of the principle that issues not pleaded can be considered if fully canvassed at trial.
Cited to reinforce that parties define the nature of their dispute and courts adjudicate only that dispute.
Court considers the general position that a court may not grant relief not asked for or decide issues not presented, but notes the true rule allows moulding…
Cited for the principle that the purpose of pleadings is to define the issues for parties and the court.
Applied to emphasize that it is impermissible for a court to raise new issues not traversed in the pleadings or affidavits, in support of the finding that the…
Court applies the principle that parties must set out and define the nature of the dispute in pleadings, including constitutional complaints, and cannot rely…
Court cited this case as authority that courts should decide matters only on issues pleaded or canvassed with the parties, and not on unpleaded issues.
Cited for the principle that new issues not raised before the court a quo cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
Cited in support of the principle regarding the objective of pleadings to inform parties of the case they have to meet.
Cited on the principle that the conduct of the trial is usually a matter for the parties to determine as they present their cases.
Court applies the principle that courts must confine themselves to issues raised by the parties and not decide on issues mero motu unless they arise fully from…
This case is cited for the principle that parties define the issues and the court adjudicates only that dispute.
The court cites this case for the principle that a court may consider a point of law not raised in motion papers if all relevant facts are before the court.
Cited for the rule that once the pleadings have defined the dispute between parties, the court must determine that dispute and that dispute alone.
Cited for the proposition that it is not for the court to raise new issues not traversed in the pleadings or affidavits, and that a court may do so only if no…
Court cites Fischer for the principle that affidavits define the issues to be adjudicated in application proceedings.
The minority judgment applies the Fischer principle that an appellate court is confined to evidence that was admitted before the court below, except for…
Applied to hold that in the adversarial system, courts may not raise new issues not traversed in the pleadings or affidavits and insist that parties deal with…
Followed to warn against determining matters on issues that do not arise from the papers.
Cited for the proposition that a party must plead all material facts material to the cause of action, which are distinct from evidence.
The court applies this authority on the adversarial nature of civil litigation and the principle that parties define the dispute and courts adjudicate on those…
Cited for the principle that it is for the parties to set out and define the nature of their dispute and for the court to adjudicate upon those issues; that…
The SCA applied this case for the principle that parties define their dispute in pleadings or affidavits and the court must adjudicate only on those issues,…
The court applies the principles on when fresh points may be raised on appeal, requiring that facts be fully canvassed and no prejudice occasioned.
Cited for the principle that courts adjudicate only the issues identified in the pleadings by the parties.