The applicants were seeking relief against the respondents to reinstate them as labour tenants and to pay the applicants' costs of suit. The applicants are adults residing on the farm Daggakraal, Mpumalanga and the respondents are farmers who obtained a final order of eviction against them. A settlement was reached between the applicants and the respondents.

The applicants are seeking relief against the judgment of the court in which the respondent was awarded the sum of R12 000 and interest thereon from the date of judgment to date of payment and costs and leave to appeal for defamation of character. The applicants are the editor, proprietor and publisher of the news magazine named 'Frontline'. The appeal was dismissed with costs, including of two counsel.

The applicant who is a member of Inkatha and holds a top position in his party was seeking relief against the respondent for defamation of character and damages which resulted when his party was trying to further its aims and objectives. Leave to appeal was granted.

This is an appeal against the amendment of the respondents plea. The applicants are the editor, owner and publisher and journalist of the Pretoria News. The appeal was dismissed with costs including of two counsel.

The applicant who is an adult male delivery assistant was assaulted by the four members of the South African Defence Force. As a result of the assault, the applicant sustained injuries and lost the sight of his left eye. The applicant was suing Minister of Defence for an amount of R52 540 — 00. The respondent was held liable for the injuries and ordered to pay the applicant.

The applicant was seeking relief from the respondent, the Minister of Police, damages of R36 000 - 00 said to have been sustained at 18h30 on 11 February 1986 near a street called NY108 in Gugulethu. She was struck in the neck by a projectile fired by a member of the South African Police which damaged her vocal chords. The applicant was awarded R14000, costs of the application and of the postponement.

The applicants were now appealing against their convictions and sentences. The applicants were convicted of contravening section 1(1) (a) of the Trespass Act no.6 of 1959. The appeal succeeded, the conviction and sentences of all applicants were set aside.

The applicant applied as a matter of urgency for his release from detention contending that his continued detention was unlawful in terms of the Aliens Control Act no 96 of 1991. He was arrested on 12 August 1994, charged on four counts under the Act. The application was successful.

The applicants were seeking relief against the respondents by declaring the evictions unlawful. The applicants were renting one of the respondents properties and had a default judgment against them. The preliminary injunction was subsequently confirmed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.