Ambitious Group (Pty) Ltd v Mdletshe and Another (2022/035571) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1091 (27 September 2023)

Ambitious Group (Pty) Ltd v Mdletshe and Another (2022/035571) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1091 (27 September 2023)

The court found that the respondents had the requisite locus standi to institute the main application, noting that the applicant had previously conceded this point and that there was no contractual prohibition against the respondents seeking protection of their rights. The court held that the applicant's arguments regarding fault and intent did not present reasonable prospects of success, as the substance of the judgment was correct. The court further determined that there were no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act, and that the judgment was not in conflict with previous decisions. The application for leave to appeal was...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1091
Parties
Applicant: Ambitious Group (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Ndumiso Siyabulela Mdletshe; Respondent: Siphelele Mbongi Dunywa
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 September 2023
Case Number
2022/035571
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Application and Section 18 Application.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
B.C. Wanless
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Test, Locus Standi, Copyright Dispute, Interdict, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Leave to Appeal Test Locus Standi Copyright Dispute Interdict 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ambitious Group (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Ndumiso Siyabulela Mdletshe

Respondent

Siphelele Mbongi Dunywa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Application and Section 18 Application.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents had locus standi to institute the main application for relief.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's actions constituted fault under the lex aquilia.
  3. 3 Whether the order granted in the main application was final and thus appealable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents had the requisite locus standi to institute the main application, noting that the applicant had previously conceded this point and that there was no contractual prohibition against the respondents seeking protection of their rights. The court held that the applicant's arguments regarding fault and intent did not present reasonable prospects of success, as the substance of the judgment was correct. The court further determined that there were no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act, and that the judgment was not in conflict with previous decisions. The application for leave to appeal was...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal.