Bedrock Drilling BK v Du Preez (32488/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 210 (20 April 2015)

Bedrock Drilling BK v Du Preez (32488/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 210 (20 April 2015)

The court found that there were reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion regarding whether the parties entered into a partnership or merely had joint ownership of the yellow drill. The applicant's contention that the nature of the agreement was not properly considered, and that the order for a statement of account may have been too broad, provided sufficient grounds for granting leave to appeal. The respondent's concession that only information relating to the yellow drill was sought further supported the need for appellate review. The court therefore granted leave to appeal to the full court against the whole of the judgment and order handed down on 19...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 210
Parties
Applicant: Bedrock Drilling BK; Respondent: Johan Nicolaas du Preez
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 April 2015
Case Number
32488/2012
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the full court is granted against the whole of the judgment and order handed down on 19 December 2014.
Judges
E.M. Kubushi
Legal Topics
Partnership Agreement, Statement of Account, Leave to Appeal, Costs Order
Commercial and Corporate Partnership Agreement Statement of Account Leave to Appeal 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bedrock Drilling BK

Applicant

Johan Nicolaas du Preez

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a partnership agreement was entered into between the parties.
  2. 2 If a partnership existed, what was the nature of the partnership.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should provide the respondent with a statement of account for the relevant period.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there were reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion regarding whether the parties entered into a partnership or merely had joint ownership of the yellow drill. The applicant's contention that the nature of the agreement was not properly considered, and that the order for a statement of account may have been too broad, provided sufficient grounds for granting leave to appeal. The respondent's concession that only information relating to the yellow drill was sought further supported the need for appellate review. The court therefore granted leave to appeal to the full court against the whole of the judgment and order handed down on 19...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the full court is granted against the whole of the judgment and order handed down on 19 December 2014.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to appeal to the full court of this division against the whole of the judgment and order handed down on 19 December 2014.
  • The costs of the application are costs in the appeal.