ABSA Bank Limited v Parker and Another (05002/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 326 (17 April 2023)
The court found that the grounds advanced in support of the application for leave to appeal had already been fully considered in the previous judgment and written reasons. Upon review, the judge was satisfied that the law and facts had been properly addressed and that the threshold for leave to appeal, as set out in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] ZAGPJHC 326
- Parties
- Applicant: ABSA Bank Limited; Respondent: Parker Spencer Ryan; Respondent: Parker Gregory Wayne
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 05002/2020
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Written Reasons
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- ML Senyatsi
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act, Costs Order
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ABSA Bank Limited
Applicant
Parker Spencer Ryan
Respondent
Parker Gregory Wayne
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Written Reasons
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has met the threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.
- 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
- 3 Whether there are compelling reasons, including conflicting judgments, for granting leave to appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the grounds advanced in support of the application for leave to appeal had already been fully considered in the previous judgment and written reasons. Upon review, the judge was satisfied that the law and facts had been properly addressed and that the threshold for leave to appeal, as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act, had not been met. There were no reasonable prospects of success nor compelling reasons, such as conflicting judgments, to justify granting leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application was dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA(GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG)
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
CASE NO: 05002/2020
NOT REPORTABLE
NOT OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES
NOT REVISED
In the matter between:
ABSA BANK LIMITED Applicant and PARKER SPENCER RYAN First Respondent PARKER GREGORY WAYNE Second Respondent
Neutral Citation: ABSA Bank Limited v Parker Spencer Ryan and Parker Gregory Wayne (Case No: 05002/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 326 (17 April 2023)
Delivered: By transmission to the parties via email and uploading onto Case Lines
the Judgment is deemed to be delivered. The date for hand-down is deemed to be
17 April 2023.
JUDGMENT
(Leave to Appeal Application)
SENYATSI J:
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal against the order of this court granted on 14 October 2021, which was followed by written reasons provided on 27 January 2023 and sent to the parties electronically.
[2] For convenience sake, the parties will be referred to as in the main application.
[3] It is a trite principle of our law that leave to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion that the appeal would have reasonable prospect of success or where there is a compelling reason, including conflicting judgments, why the appeal should be heard.[1]
[4] The test whether the requirements of section 17(1)(a) of the Act have been met is a stringent one.[2]
[5] The grounds of appeal have been spelt out in the notice of application for leave to appeal and will not be repeated in this judgment. I appreciate the contribution by counsel for the applicant and the effort by both respondents regarding the heads of arguments which have been considered in this judgment.
[6] Having considered the grounds raised in support of the application for leave to appeal; I am satisfied that the order and the reasons for the judgment have fully considered the law and the facts.
[7] It follows in my opinion, that there is no prospect that the appeal would succeed because the threshold as required by the Act has not been met. There are also no compelling reasons why the appeal should be heard.
ORDER
[8] Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
ML SENYATSI
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
DATE JUDGMENT RESERVED: 27 February 2023
DATE JUDGMENT DELIVERED: 17 April 2023
APPEARANCES
Counsel for the Applicants: Adv N Alli Instructed by: Jay Mothobi Incorporated Representation for the Respondents: Self-represented
[1] Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act No.10 of 2013 (“the Act”)
[2] See MEC for Health, Eastern Cape v Mkhitha and Another [2016] ZASCA 176 paras 16-17