A.M v H.M and Others (42362/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 325 (9 April 2024)

A.M v H.M and Others (42362/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 325 (9 April 2024)

The court found that, having considered all the issues raised in the application for leave to appeal, there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion. The judge was persuaded that the threshold for granting leave to appeal, as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act, was met. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the full bench of the Division was granted, with costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 325
Parties
Applicant: A[...] M[...]; Respondent: H[...] M[...]; Respondent: H[...] M[...] N.O.; Respondent: A[...] M[...] N.O.; Respondent: THE STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA; Respondent: THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 April 2024
Case Number
42362/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Exception
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the full bench of the Division against the judgment and order of 31 August 2023 is granted.
Judges
Bokako
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Exception Procedure, Prospects of Success, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Exception Procedure Prospects of Success Costs Order

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A[...] M[...]

Applicant

H[...] M[...]

Respondent

H[...] M[...] N.O.

Respondent

A[...] M[...] N.O.

Respondent

THE STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA

Respondent

THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Exception

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order of 31 August 2023.
  2. 2 Whether there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard by a higher court.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded in the application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, having considered all the issues raised in the application for leave to appeal, there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion. The judge was persuaded that the threshold for granting leave to appeal, as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act, was met. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the full bench of the Division was granted, with costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the full bench of the Division against the judgment and order of 31 August 2023 is granted.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this Division against the judgment and order of 31 August 2023 is granted.
  • Costs of the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.