Total South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Meyer

Cited for the principle that a judgment like any other document must be read as a whole in order to ascertain its intention.

Court follows this case as part of the line of authority on factors to be taken into account in considering whether a party acted in breach of a legal duty.

Cited for the general principle that once a court has duly pronounced a final judgment or order, it has itself no authority to correct, alter, or supplement…

Cited for the proposition that the basic principles applicable to construing documents also apply to the construction of a court order, with the court's…

Cited for the proposition that court orders must be clear and unambiguous, at 304D-G.

Cited for the principle that the intention of a judgment or order is to be ascertained primarily from the language of the judgment or order and by reading the…

Cited for the common law principle that a court may clarify an order where the meaning of its words remain obscure, ambiguous or otherwise uncertain, provided…

Cited for the proper method of recording observations of the court at an inspection in loco.

Court cites this case for exceptions to the general rule that courts cannot vary their own final orders, including correction of errors and addressing matters…

Cited regarding wrongfulness determination involving legal duty and public policy considerations.

Cited for the test of determining the debtor's intention in establishing acts of insolvency.

Applied to explain the power of a court to correct clerical errors in judgment or order but not to alter its intended sense or substance, and the object of the…

Cited for the principle that a court's intention is ascertained primarily from the language of the judgment or order as construed according to the usual…

Cited for the fundamental principle that once a court has finally pronounced its judgment on a case, its authority over that case ceases.

General principles of interpretation apply to construction of court orders.

Cited for the principle that the court's discretion to rescind a judgment is sparingly exercised in the interests of finality in litigation.

Cited for the principles of interpretation of court orders.

The High Court's interpretation of section 197(2) that no greater or lesser reciprocal rights and obligations can be imposed in the absence of agreement…

Applied the test that a court's intention must be established from the language of the judgment or order and extrinsic circumstances can be considered if there…

Cited for the common law principle that a court becomes functus officio once it has pronounced a final judgment and cannot vary it, save for recognized…

Court cited this decision as an example of Labour Court invoking section 3 of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act to determine admissibility of hearsay evidence

The court follows Bayer to support the principle that a negligent misstatement inducing a representee to enter into a contract may give rise to a delictual…

Applied to ascertain the intention of a judgment or order by reading it as a whole in accordance with rules of interpretation.

The court distinguished the facts of Aunde where the employer unilaterally terminated the consultation process, from the present case where the applicant…

Cited as illustrative of South African law on liability for negligent misstatements.

Court applies the principle that the parties' conduct after termination can establish a tacit relocation of a franchise agreement on the same terms as existed…

Applied principle that a judgment or order may subsequently be supplemented in respect of accessory or consequential matters which the court overlooked or…

Court cites this case for the principle that when interpreting a court's judgment or order, the court's intention must be ascertained primarily from the…

Applied in relation to the interpretation of court orders.

Cited for the principle that once a court has pronounced final judgment or order it becomes functus officio and cannot correct, alter or supplement it.

Cited at para 13 for the principle that lay litigants should not be held to the same standard of accuracy as lawyers and their pleadings should be construed…

This case establishes the principle that the same rules apply to construing court orders as apply to construing documents, and that the court's intention is to…

Cited for the rule that a court becomes functus officio after pronouncing judgment and may generally not amend or set aside it, with limited exceptions.

Court applies the exceptions to the functus officio rule formulated in this case, including that a court may clarify its judgment or correct errors without…

Applied to identify and apply the four exceptions to the functus officio rule and to determine whether the court could amend its costs order.

Applied for the principle that a court's order must be read together with its reasons to ascertain its meaning, and also cited regarding when a court of final…

Cited for the principle that once a court has delivered a final order or judgment it becomes functus officio and thus cannot correct, alter or supplement the…

The Court cites the common law principle that once a court has pronounced a final judgment or order it becomes functus officio, and that the discretionary…

Quoted with approval by the Constitutional Court to establish principles of interpreting judgments or orders.

Followed for the principle that once a court has pronounced a final judgment or order, it has no authority to correct, alter, or supplement it and becomes…

Court applies the test for delictual liability for negligent misstatement set out by Corbett CJ in Bayer, requiring proof of misstatement, negligence,…

Court applies the principle that once a court has pronounced a final judgment or order, it becomes functus officio and has no authority to correct, alter, or…

Applied for the general principle that once a court or decision-maker has duly pronounced a final judgment or order, it becomes functus officio and has no…

Considered as authority for the general common law principle that once a final judgment is pronounced the court becomes functus officio and has no authority to…

Courts have the discretion to vary their orders, albeit that this discretion must be exercised sparingly.

Cited at 570D–F and J for the principle that wrongfulness in misrepresentation cases is essentially a question of legal policy.

Applied principle that extrinsic circumstances may be considered when interpreting contracts, by analogy to the interpretation of expert determinations and…

Cited for the principle that the court's intention in a judgment must be ascertained from the language of the order interpreted on its terms and the court's…

The court cites this case for the principle that what is a reasonable time for bringing a rescission application depends on the facts of each individual case.

Applied to establish the principle that a court may clarify its judgment or order if, on proper interpretation, the meaning is obscure, ambiguous or otherwise…

Applied for the four exceptions to the functus officio rule where a court may alter, vary or supplement its order, including correcting clerical errors and…

Court applied the seminal Firestone judgment on the exceptional powers of the court to vary, correct or amend its own order as set out by Trollip JA.

The Court applies the general common law principles set out by Trollip JA concerning a court's power to vary a final judgment or order and the functus officio…

Cited as authority recognizing the duty on courts in eviction matters to consider all relevant circumstances.

Appellate Division stated that finality in litigation is reached when the judicial process ends.