Christian v Namibia Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority (2) (APPEAL 244 of 2010) [2018] NAHCMD 19 (8 February 2018)

Christian v Namibia Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority (2) (APPEAL 244 of 2010) [2018] NAHCMD 19 (8 February 2018)

There is nothing improper with a respondent raising points of law and filing an answering affidavit simultaneously; the rules must be interpreted to serve justice, and the applicant failed to show prejudice or that the order was wrong. The High Court cannot rescind or vary its own order in these circumstances; the proper route is appeal.

Citation
[2018] NAHCMD 19
Parties
Applicant: Hendrik Christian; Respondent: Namibia Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
8 February 2018
Case Number
APPEAL 244 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Rescission of Order / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Points of Law in Limine, Court's Power to Overturn Own Orders, Interpretation of Court Rules
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Points of Law in Limine Court's Power to Overturn Own Orders Interpretation of Court Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hendrik Christian

Applicant

Namibia Financial Institutions Supervisory Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Rescission of Order / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a respondent may file both an answering affidavit and raise points in limine
  2. 2 Whether the High Court can rescind or vary its own order in these circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

There is nothing improper with a respondent raising points of law and filing an answering affidavit simultaneously; the rules must be interpreted to serve justice, and the applicant failed to show prejudice or that the order was wrong. The High Court cannot rescind or vary its own order in these circumstances; the proper route is appeal.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application is dismissed.
  • Costs will follow the event.