A.M.D v C.D.D and Others (2024/142336) [2025] ZAGPJHC 208 (5 March 2025)

A.M.D v C.D.D and Others (2024/142336) [2025] ZAGPJHC 208 (5 March 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success for an appeal against the costs order. The judge had exercised judicial discretion properly, considering all relevant facts and legal principles. The appointments of the curatrix ad litem and social worker were made by the Children’s Court, and their entitlement to costs followed from their appointments. The applicant’s arguments regarding jurisdiction and prejudice did not establish exceptional circumstances or a basis for overturning the costs order. The opposition by the first respondent was not found to be frivolous, and the applicant was not entitled to costs as the successful party. The...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 208
Parties
Applicant: A M D; Respondent: C D D; Respondent: ACTING MAGISTRATE PIETERSE-KRIEL N O; Respondent: TANYA KRIEL; Respondent: ADVOCATE N STRATHERN N O; Respondent: ADVOCATE ELIZABETH NIEWOUDT N O; Respondent: ADVOCATE KAREN GREEN N O
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2025
Case Number
2024/142336
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Adams
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Leave to Appeal, Children S Act, Judicial Discretion, Curatrix Ad Litem, Review of Magistrates Court
Civil Procedure Family and Children Costs Orders Leave to Appeal Children S Act Judicial Discretion Curatrix Ad Litem Review of Magistrates Court

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A M D

Applicant

C D D

Respondent

ACTING MAGISTRATE PIETERSE-KRIEL N O

Respondent

TANYA KRIEL

Respondent

ADVOCATE N STRATHERN N O

Respondent

ADVOCATE ELIZABETH NIEWOUDT N O

Respondent

ADVOCATE KAREN GREEN N O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge exercised judicial discretion properly in awarding costs to the curatrix ad litem and social worker.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant established exceptional circumstances justifying leave to appeal the costs order.
  3. 3 Whether the Magistrate's Court had jurisdiction to appoint the curatrix ad litem and social worker.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success for an appeal against the costs order. The judge had exercised judicial discretion properly, considering all relevant facts and legal principles. The appointments of the curatrix ad litem and social worker were made by the Children’s Court, and their entitlement to costs followed from their appointments. The applicant’s arguments regarding jurisdiction and prejudice did not establish exceptional circumstances or a basis for overturning the costs order. The opposition by the first respondent was not found to be frivolous, and the applicant was not entitled to costs as the successful party. The...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant shall pay the first respondent’s costs of this application for leave to appeal, including Counsel’s charges on scale ‘B’ of the Tariff applicable in terms of the Uniform Rules of Court.