Adams & Adams

The Eastern Cape High Court recently reaffirmed how prescription works in medical malpractice cases. The judgment emphasises that these matters are highly fact-sensitive, particularly for claimants without medical expertise. It explored what “knowledge of the facts” means under section 12(3) of the Prescription Act and section 3 of the Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act. The key insight: prescription in medical negligence cases depends on the specific facts, and defendants who raise prescription too early risk failure if plaintiffs act promptly after obtaining expert confirmation. Click here for more: https://buff.ly/7gjoKjY #MedicalNegligence #Litigation #AdamsAdamsLaw

The Department of Agriculture has published new regulations for plant-based meat alternatives in South Africa and it’s good news for both the industry and consumers. Under the Veggie Regs, terms such as burger, sausage, patty, banger, griller, mince, schnitzel and more can now be used for plant-based products, provided they include a clear descriptor such as vegan, veggie, or plant-based. What’s out? Animal names, cuts, and images. The aim of these regulations is to protect consumers from misleading labels while allowing vegetarians and vegans to enjoy familiar favourites. This marks a fair compromise between the meat and plant-based sectors and ensures clarity without limiting choice. For businesses in the food industry, compliance with these new rules is essential. Click here to learn more: https://buff.ly/fpa0YpV #PlantBased #RegulatoryUpdates #ConsumerProtection #AdamsAdamsLaw

The Johannesburg High Court recently addressed an important question: can affidavits be commissioned virtually when the deponent is outside South Africa and the Commissioner of Oaths is within the country? The case involved affidavits signed in Italy and commissioned via Zoom by South African attorneys. The court clarified that current legislation requires physical presence and that South African attorneys cannot administer oaths beyond national borders. Nevertheless, the affidavits were accepted due to substantial compliance and the interests of justice. As legal practice becomes more global and digital, South Africa’s laws must evolve to accommodate remote processes like virtual commissioning. While virtual commissioning isn't formally recognised yet, courts may accept it under certain conditions, highlighting the necessity for modernising laws to align with today's technological advancements. Click here for more: https://buff.ly/KpgcqEk Mtho Maphumulo #VirtualCommissioning #AdamsAdamsLaw

On 4 November 2025, the Pretoria High Court delivered an important judgment on the nature and limits of interim relief in HPCSA disciplinary matters. The court held that section 42 of the Health Professions Act imposes mandatory suspension until appeals are finalised, prioritising public protection over individual prejudice. Financial loss is not considered exceptional, and courts will only intervene for extraordinary grounds such as constitutional breaches. This ruling highlights strict accountability for healthcare professionals: ethical misconduct can lead to erasure, and noting an appeal does not guarantee continued practice. Read more here: https://buff.ly/O6WHDNg #HealthcareLaw #HPCSA #AdamsAdamsLaw

After nearly two years of litigation, the Pretoria High Court has ruled that Benji, a young Labrador, must be returned to the applicant. This marks an important moment in South African family law. Under current law, pets are treated as property rather than dependants, so the court focused on ownership rather than which home was best for the dog. The judgment ordered Benji’s immediate return and authorised the Sheriff to enforce compliance if necessary. This case highlights a growing trend of pet-related disputes in divorce proceedings. As more couples choose pets over children, will the law adapt to consider their welfare rather than ownership? Read more here: https://buff.ly/osiuKaF #adamsadamslaw #familylaw #petownership #divorcelaw

Courts are increasingly treating biometric identifiers such as facial geometry as “confidential or personal information”, which can leave businesses exposed to significant risk. In a recent U.S. district court decision, a commercial general liability (CGL) policy’s exclusion for “access or disclosure of confidential or personal information” was found to bar coverage for a class action under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The case involved a photo-sharing platform for summer camps that used facial recognition technology where plaintiffs alleged unlawful collection and storage of facial geometry. The insurer denied coverage and sought a declaration of no duty to defend or indemnify, which the insured contested. The court held that biometric identifiers qualify as confidential or personal information, so the exclusion applied and removed both defence and indemnity. Click here to learn more about the importance of reviewing privacy‑related exclusions to avoid coverage pitfalls: https://buff.ly/ujHNImt #BiometricData #InsuranceLaw #RiskManagement #AdamsAdamsLaw Jean-Paul Rudd