Helfer & Company Attorneys

Helfer & Company Attorneys Informs on legal rights, developments, court decisions, how to sue or defend summons in Botswana, on business and commercial dealings, & entertainment law.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/133.htmlReportable SA Supreme Court of Appeal judgment HELD: Prescription per...
22/09/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/133.html
Reportable SA Supreme Court of Appeal judgment HELD: Prescription period does not commence to run on date of signature of written agreement but on date that a suspensive condition is fulfilled. Appeal against Special Plea of prescription allowed.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/395.html W[...] v W[...] (Case no 12866/2014) [2025] ZAWCHC 392 (01-09-2025)...
02/09/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/395.html
W[...] v W[...] (Case no 12866/2014) [2025] ZAWCHC 392 (01-09-2025)
This case is only suitable for those who have the energy to read matrimonial extreme telenovela dicta. An ex-husband launched 11 separate cases to avoid complying with a divoice orfer granted in 2020. Some of the cases are still pending. The quote below from the judgment which made an order that he was a “vexatious litigant” refers to these 11 cases and believe or not further states that:
“[4] In addition to the above, the respondent has to date not paid any of the costs he was ordered to pay in some of the legal proceedings mentioned above. Additionally, the legal proceedings referred to above exclude those in which the applicant successfully instituted claims against the respondent, in respect of which the respondent has still not paid the costs awarded against him.
[5] The respondent has not spared the professionals involved in the ongoing litigation between himself and the applicant. He has lodged complaints against the applicant’s legal representatives, his own legal representatives, and his forensic expert. The members of this Court have not been spared either, as the presiding judge who granted the Divorce Order was subjected to a complaint to the Judicial Services Commission.
[6] As if all the above were not enough, the respondent began issuing threats from around May 2025. Some of these threats targeted the applicant’s legal representatives. The attorneys were threatened with a R210 million lawsuit, and counsel was threatened with a R190 million lawsuit. The respondent’s former legal representatives also did not escape the respondent’s threats.
[7] The respondent has even resorted to blackmail. In early June 2025, he threatened to report the applicant’s legal representatives to the Legal Practice Council if they did not agree to the postponement of the sale in ex*****on authorised by the court under the Rule 46A Order. The respondent has also escalated all of the complaints he had lodged with the Legal Practice Council against the applicant’s current and former legal representatives to the Legal Services Ombud.
[8] On 9 June 2025, the respondent wrote to the applicant’s legal representatives demanding that they recuse themselves from representing the applicant in any current or future litigation against him. This was followed, on 10 June 2025, by supplementary complaints to the Legal Practice Council against the applicant’s attorneys and counsel.”

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAEQC/2025/6.html South African Human Rights Commission and Anor v Julius Malema and EFF...
28/08/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAEQC/2025/6.html
South African Human Rights Commission and Anor v Julius Malema and EFF (EC16/2022 ; 17/2022) [2025] ZAEQC 6 (27 August 2025)
South African Equality Court HELD:
“115. In summary therefore the [quoted] offending statements …[of Julius Malema” , constituted an exhortation to kill white males who had participated in the incident of 9 November 2020 at the Brackenfell High School and to kill, or respond violently, to any other persons who engaged in racist behaviour towards members of the 2nd respondent [EFF] in the future. They were based on grounds prohibited by the Act and constituted hate speech, contrary to the provisions of s10, as they demonstrated a clear intention to incite harm and to promote or propagate hatred. A declaratory order to this effect must accordingly issue.
…
119. In the result I make the following order[with costs]:
1. It is declared that statements in the speech which was made by the 1st respondent at the occasion of the holding of the 3rd provincial People’s Assembly of the 2nd respondent in the Western Cape on 16 October 2022, constituted hate speech, contrary to the provisions of s10 of the Equality Act 4 of 2000, in that they were based on grounds which are prohibited in the Act and demonstrated a clear intention to incite harm and to promote or propagate hatred.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/385.html Wingfield Motors (Pty) Ltd v National Consumer Tribunal and Others ...
27/08/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/385.html
Wingfield Motors (Pty) Ltd v National Consumer Tribunal and Others (Appeal) 2025 ZAWCHC 385
HELD: Second hand motor dealership breached six month statutory warranty when it failed to repair motor vehicle or accept return and replacement or refund. See
“[89] To the extent that Wingfield claims that the defects in the clutch and the flywheel were caused by the manner of driving of the Customer or his son, Wingfield did not present any evidence to support that claim but merely speculated. With the evidence pointing to the presence of the defects, it was for Wingfield to prove that vehicle goods had been altered after leaving its control. To overcome this obstacle, Wingfield shifts the responsibility to the Tribunal, suggesting that it was for it to prove that the defects were not due to the manner in which the vehicle was driven.
[90] The approach taken by Wingfield is detrimental to the very purpose of the CPA and the NCA. Wingfield could have easily settled this issue at the point when the Customer merely asked Wingfield to pay for the repairs. Wingfield refused despite the obligations imposed by section 56(2)(a) of the CPA.
[91] When the Customer resorted to tendering the return of the vehicle, as he is entitled to under section 56(2)(b) of the CPA, Wingfield would have none of that. But for the intervention of the NCC and the Tribunal, the Customer would have been left out in the cold. And that would have completely undermined the provisions of the CPA.
[92] None of the grounds of appeal and/or review have merit, and both should be dismissed with costs.”

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/376.html Wentzel v Banxso (Pty) Ltd and Ors (23249/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 376 (...
25/08/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2025/376.html
Wentzel v Banxso (Pty) Ltd and Ors (23249/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 376 (22 August 2025)
HELD: That it would be just and equitable to wind-up Banxso as it is promoted for the purpose of perpetrating fraud or deception on investors as an online investment/trading platform. (Is this a pyramid scheme scam)
See paragraphs below:
[54] The FSCA has in detail set out the reasons why it decided to provisional withdrew Banxo’s FSP license. The allegations underpinning the complaints by Banxso’s clients were the following:

(a) The complainants saw various advertisements that were circulating on social media, including a news article which purported to be from the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) relating to an investment platform known as Immediate Matrix. The news article stated that Tesla/Elon Musk launched a new platform, called Immediate Matrix, (IM) which was an automated trading platform aimed at helping families become wealthier;
(b) The news article and advertisements (videos) referred to a minimum investment deposit of R4 700, with a promised return of R34 300 within a week. This equated to a return of approximately 730% in one week:
(c) the IM webpage reflected that prospective investors would be contacted but it did not explain who would be contacting the prospective investors. However, after the prospective investors submitted their details, within minutes; they were contacted by one of Banxso’s agents through SMS, email or telephone call;
(d) in addition to the promotional videos and news articles with a link, Immediate Matrix also had a website. On IM’s website, prospective investors were requested to submit their personal details. However, the process differed slightly on the website compared to the advertisements, in that on the website, once the details were captured and the ’submit’ button clicked, the website redirected the prospective investors to a ‘thank you’ webpage. On the ‘thank you’ webpage, another button called ’continue to account’ popped up. After clicking the ‘continue to account’ button, it redirected the prospective investors to Banxso’s website, with another pop-up to make a deposit into the newly created account with Banxso;
(e) the Banxso agents assisted them with opening trading accounts and solicited the initial deposit from the prospective client as advertised by IM. After making the deposits, the agents directed the investors to enter specific trades derivatives, which ultimately led to massive trading losses;
(f) the consultants used aggressive and high-pressure sales techniques to convince investors to invest additional funds;
(g) the complainants were lured by the deepfake videos featuring celebrities / prominent persons and which promised high returns;
(h) they also alleged that once they invested with Banxso, Banxso failed to process their withdrawal requests timeously and did not disclose material information such as swap fees and the risks associated with trading.

[55] The FSCA, ultimately recorded that having regard to the complaints, and its own investigation, including an analyses of Banxso’s bank accounts, it established that: The deepfake advertisements appeared to have been created by IM, a fictitious entity with no real corporate persona; the identities of the celebrities and prominent persons featured in the deepfake videos were fraudulently used; The videos and news articles contained electronic links that led to an IM webpage, through which prospective investors could provide their personal details, as well as their contact details; when the prospective clients clicked on the link on the deepfake advertisements, they were redirected to Banxso’s website. The clients’ funds were then transferred into Banxso’s bank account. The products offered by Banxso were similar to the ones on the deepfake advertisement. The client deposits into the various Banxso bank accounts were consistent with the investment opportunities advertised through the deepfake advertisements; the IM webpage reflected that prospective investors who submitted their personal information would receive a call from a person who would assist the prospective investors in setting up their trading accounts in derivatives. The prospective investors were contacted by Banxso agents who fulfilled the commitments made by IM in the deepfake advertisements; Banxso agents contacted clients and confirmed that they were calling because the prospective clients showed interest in the IM product or in connection with the advertisements which featured the prominent persons; the deposits into Banxso’s bank accounts increased significantly when the deepfake advertisements gained prominence; and a high number of clients confirmed that they invested with Banxso because of the deepfake advertisements.

[56] Banxo denied any association with the IM scheme and disputes the FSCA’s findings. According to Banxso it did not act fraudulently or unlawfully and intends to traverse the FSCA’s findings in the appropriate forums. It admitted that its website called for an industry standard deposit of roughly 250 US dollars, translating to approximately R 4 700 (at the time) and is a figure which IM also used in their marketing material.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAMPMBHC/2025/75.htmlAttorneys who provide adverse investigative report to clients in pr...
13/08/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAMPMBHC/2025/75.html
Attorneys who provide adverse investigative report to clients in privileged setting have not published defamation and do not have intention to defame/injure. Defamation claim of R2million for "false, wrongful, unlawful, and defamatory statements directed at him both personally and in his professional capacity" dismissed. HELD:
"[26] There can be no dispute that the first and second defendants were complying with their instructions to investigate and file a report. It was never suggested that the first and second defendants were on a frolic of their own when they made their findings and gave their opinion. The occasion in which the publication occurred could only have been, on the plaintiff’s own version, a formal meeting attended only by the 28 Councillors. The report was made on a qualified privileged occasion in which the first and second defendants were doing their job in compiling a report and gave their opinion on their findings. It follows that this negates any notion of animus iniuriandi."

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/96.htmlReportable SA SCA judgment. Directors of a company in Business Rescue(...
04/07/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/96.html
Reportable SA SCA judgment. Directors of a company in Business Rescue(in liquidation) instructed attorneys to file application for removal of BR Practitioners (Liquidators) Liquidators. Application was granted. BRPs(Liquidators) appealed. Appeal was granted. HELD Directors have limited rights in their capacity – Cannot independently initiate litigation or appoint legal representatives without BRPractitioners’ approval – Only BRPractitioners could authorize litigation – Directors lacked authority – Actions rendered invalid

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/91.htmlSA SCA granted appeal and dismissed claim for general damages for baby...
24/06/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/91.html
SA SCA granted appeal and dismissed claim for general damages for baby born with cerebral palsy who was permanently unconscious and HELD:
[59] ...the R13,330,578.28 ..for special damages was considered sufficient to ameliorate the child’s suffering and make his life less unbearable to the extent money can achieve this. The high court awarded general damages as though the child’s condition would not be ameliorated by the amount awarded for special damages... a further substantial amount in respect of general damages was warranted...
[159] In the present case, adequate provision has been made for the child’s physical needs by an award of special damages. There was no evidence as to what the additional amounts, over and above those provided for by special damages, would be used for. In the absence of any indication as to how that amount was likely to be used for the exclusive benefit of the child, it should not have been awarded. Awarding additional amounts for loss of amenities of life to the unconscious child would serve no purpose other than benefiting the child’s mother. The result is that there was no basis for awarding the amount of R2,200,000 for general damages.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/79.htmlAfter identity theft appellant was falsely arrested at Cape Town Airpo...
10/06/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/79.html
After identity theft appellant was falsely arrested at Cape Town Airport. Damages claim of unlawful arrest and detention. Award reduced by full court – Particularly egregious treatment – Humiliation – Degrading detention conditions – Psychological trauma – Constitutional rights violations – Cruelty displayed by police – Prolonged detention under harsh conditions justified higher damages – Profound suffering and systemic disregard for human dignity – Reduced award of R350,000 failed to account for severity of violations – Appeal upheld – amount increased to R580,000.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/70.htmlHELD: International Arbitration clause was peremptory and high court h...
03/06/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZASCA/2025/70.html
HELD: International Arbitration clause was peremptory and high court had no jurisdiction for order it made. IDC and AfDB win appeal against said court order granted to the 3 "Kgalagadi" companies respondents to compel appellants to agree to debt restructuring of accelerated claim of R3billion. Rorder was obtained after Kalagadi Manganese placed in business rescue(judicial management). Application stayed pending arbitration in England.

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAKZPHC/2025/54.htmlLitigation Strategy 101: Leave to appeal refused. Father's expert wi...
02/06/2025

https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAKZPHC/2025/54.html
Litigation Strategy 101: Leave to appeal refused. Father's expert witness gave evidence contradicting his claim for custody of son and daughter. After 3 days of evidence he then negotiated with mother a consent order agreement for separation of children. Court refused to make it order of court as it was not in the best interests of the children. HELD:
[27] Parents may choose no longer to have a relationship with each other, for that is their right. But by exercising that right they may not infringe the right of siblings to grow up with each other. I do not believe that I overemphasized this fundamental, yet basic principle.

Address

Plot 28562, Samora Machel Drive, Unit F5 Fairground Mall Above Chicken Licken
Gaborone
0000

Opening Hours

Monday 08:00 - 17:00
Tuesday 08:00 - 17:00
Wednesday 08:00 - 17:00
Thursday 08:00 - 17:00
Friday 08:00 - 17:00

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Helfer & Company Attorneys posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Helfer & Company Attorneys:

Shortcuts

Share

Category