africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2025] ZAGPJHC 729South Africa

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v Absa Bank Limited (028000/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 729 (21 June 2025)

High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)
21 June 2025
OTHER J, Respondent J, Mr J

Judgment

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPJHC 729 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v Absa Bank Limited (028000/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 729 (21 June 2025) Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v Absa Bank Limited (028000/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 729 (21 June 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_729.html sino date 21 June 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO :  028000/2023 DATE :  2025-07-21 DATE 21 July 2025 (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED. In the matter between EXXARO COAL MPUMALANGA (PTY) LTD               Applicant and ABSA BANK LIMITED                                            Respondent JUDGMENT EX TEMPORE WILSON, J : The respondent, Absa Bank, applies for leave to appeal against my decision of 27 May 2025, in which I directed Absa Bank to make payment on a demand guarantee to the applicant, Exxaro Coal, in the sum of just over R22-million. The demand on which I found that this amount was due was made on 19 June 2020.  It was the second of two demands, the first of which was made on 10 June 2020. In the court a quo , Mr Am, who appeared for Absa Bank, argued that those two demands were, in effect, one act of making demand. They ought to be treated, in other words, as one continuous demand.  In my judgment, and for the reasons given there, I rejected that approach. But for the fact that another court, in a different context, accepted that approach, I would have been of the view that this application for leave to appeal bears no prospects of success. The sole basis on which I am convinced there is a reasonable prospect of success on appeal is that in an earlier iteration of this case, His Lordship Mr Justice Lamont, in dealing with the same facts, concluded that the demand of 10 June 2020 and the demand of 19 June 2020, constituted one continuous act of making demand. I am not convinced by the reasons Justice Lamont gave for reaching that conclusion but I am bound to respect the fact that Justice Lamont reached it.  It seems to me therefore, that I must, as a consequence, accept that there is a reasonable prospect that another court might also reach that conclusion, even though I think that it is incorrect. If another court reaches that conclusion and treats the demands 10 June 2020 and 19 June 2020 as one continuous act of making demand, then Absa Bank will succeed in resisting Exxaro’s claim for payment, since it appropriately rejected the 10 June demand. If there was one act of making demand and not two separate demands, then the rejection that I found was good was effective against both demands. It follows that, purely on that factual issue, there is a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion to the one I reached in my judgment and that it would dismiss the application that I allowed. Accordingly, I am constrained to grant leave to appeal. Since the point on which I have found there are prospects of success is a purely factual issue, I shall grant leave to a Full Court of this division.  By doing so I in no way wish to limit the arguments Absa may raise on appeal. For all those reasons I make the following order: 1. The application for leave to appeal succeeds. 2. Absa Bank is granted to leave to appeal to a Full Court of this division against my judgment and order of 27 May 2025. 3. The costs of this application will be costs in the appeal. WILSON, J JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT 21 July 2025 sino noindex make_database footer start

Similar Cases

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v ABSA Bank Limited (2023/028000) [2025] ZAGPJHC 499 (27 May 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 499High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v ABSA Bank Ltd and Another (2023/028000) [2024] ZAGPJHC 540 (6 June 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 540High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Ex Parte Jaco Nel Familie Trust (2024/109954) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1168 (19 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1168High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
South African Securitisation Programme (RF) Ltd v T.C Esterhuysen Primary School and Others (2024/076235) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1288 (4 December 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1288High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
South African Securitisation Programme (Rf) (Pty) Ltd v Hakem Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/009594) [2025] ZAGPJHC 230 (6 March 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 230High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar

Discussion