Avnit v First Rand Bank Ltd (20233/14) [2014] ZASCA 132 (23 September 2014)

Avnit v First Rand Bank Ltd (20233/14) [2014] ZASCA 132 (23 September 2014)

The President of the Supreme Court of Appeal found that the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as required by s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicant could not complain about the court's failure to consider facts that were not properly before it, especially since he opposed the admission of Wesbank's replying affidavit. The issues raised had already been considered by both the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal judges. The dispute regarding the judgment amount was a matter of accounting and did not warrant appellate intervention. There was no deprivation of justice or infringement of constitutional rights. Accordingly, the application for...

Citation
[2014] ZASCA 132
Parties
Appellant: David Samuel Avnit; Respondent: First Rand Bank trading inter alia as Westbank and Wesbank Aviation Finance
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 September 2014
Case Number
20233/14
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application to President of SCA for Reconsideration Under S 17(2)(f) of Superior Courts Act
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mpati
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Exceptional Circumstances, Superior Courts Act, Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Exceptional Circumstances Superior Courts Act Judicial Discretion

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Samuel Avnit

Appellant

First Rand Bank trading inter alia as Westbank and Wesbank Aviation Finance

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application to President of SCA for Reconsideration Under S 17(2)(f) of Superior Courts Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated exceptional circumstances justifying referral of the refusal of leave to appeal for reconsideration under s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the failure to admit the applicant's supplementary affidavit constituted a denial of justice.
  3. 3 Whether the judgment amount should have been reduced by the proceeds of the sale of the aircraft.

Ratio Decidendi

The President of the Supreme Court of Appeal found that the applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as required by s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicant could not complain about the court's failure to consider facts that were not properly before it, especially since he opposed the admission of Wesbank's replying affidavit. The issues raised had already been considered by both the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal judges. The dispute regarding the judgment amount was a matter of accounting and did not warrant appellate intervention. There was no deprivation of justice or infringement of constitutional rights. Accordingly, the application for...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.