LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback Law Cite

Tick v Broude     7

Cases Referring to this Case

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court †	Jurisdiction	Date	Full Text		Citation Index
Alam v Minister of Home Affairs (3414/2010)	[2012] ZAECPEHC 12; 2012 5 SA 626	Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth	South Africa	16 Feb 2012	SAFLII		1
LawCite Obiang v Van Rensburg (A338/2018)	[2019] ZAWCHC 105	High Court of South Africa - Western Cape Division	South Africa	20 Aug 2019	SAFLII
S-W v S-W (14211/2008)	[2008] ZAWCHC 324	High Court of South Africa - Western Cape Division	South Africa	1 Dec 2008	SAFLII
Terblanche v Damji (7895/2000)	[2001] ZAWCHC 3	High Court of South Africa - Western Cape Division	South Africa	11 Sep 2001	SAFLII
Robertson v Boss (LCC6R/98)	[1998] ZALCC 12	Land Claims Court of South Africa	South Africa	30 Sep 1998	SAFLII
Seaspan Grouse: Seaspan Holdco 1 Ltd v MS Mare Traveller Schiffahrts GmbH	[2019] ZASCA 2; 2019 4 SA 483	Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa	South Africa	1 Feb 2019	SAFLII		1
Purpose of rule 4 is to provide for a mechanism by which relative certainty can be obtained that service has been effected upon a defendant If certain minimum standards are complied with as set out in the rule, then the assumption is made that the service was sufficient to reach the defendant's attention and his failure to take steps is not due to the fact that he does not have knowledge of the summons The converse is not true — namely that if service is not effected as required by the rule, the service is not effective — in that the purpose for which service is required was fulfilled, namely the defendant came to know of the summons The rules, as was pointed out by Roux J in United Reflective Converters (Pty) Ltd v Levine, 1	988 SA 460		South Africa	10 May 2016	LexisNexis		2