Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd v National Commissioner, South African Police Service and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-046691) [2024] ZAGPPHC 452 (17 May 2024)
The court found that there is no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and no important points of law that warrant consideration by a higher court. The judge was unpersuaded that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] ZAGPPHC 452
- Parties
- Applicant: Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: National Commissioner, South African Police Service; Respondent: Deputy National Commissioner of Support Services of the South African Police Service; Respondent: Acting Section Head of Procurement Management of the South African Police Service; Respondent: Bid Evaluation Committee of the South African Police Service; Respondent: Bid Adjudication Committee of the South African Police Service; Respondent: ECM Group (Pty) Ltd t/a ECM Technologies; Respondent: Acino Forensics (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 2023-046691
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment by Tolmay J
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- S. Potterill
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Public Procurement, Costs Award
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
National Commissioner, South African Police Service
Respondent
Deputy National Commissioner of Support Services of the South African Police Service
Respondent
Acting Section Head of Procurement Management of the South African Police Service
Respondent
Bid Evaluation Committee of the South African Police Service
Respondent
Bid Adjudication Committee of the South African Police Service
Respondent
ECM Group (Pty) Ltd t/a ECM Technologies
Respondent
Acino Forensics (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment by Tolmay J
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
- 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
- 3 Whether there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there is no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and no important points of law that warrant consideration by a higher court. The judge was unpersuaded that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel if so employed, and costs for work done after 1 April 2024 were awarded on scale C.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- Costs are awarded against the applicant, including the costs of two counsel if so employed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
40 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
Case Number: 2023-046691
(1) REPORTABLE: NO.
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO.
(3) REVISED.
DATE: 2024-05-17
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
BEYOND FORENSICS (PTY) LTD
Applicant
and
THE NATIONAL COMMISSIONER, SOUTH
AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE
First Respondent
THE DEPUTY NATIONAL COMMISSIONER OF SUPPORT
SERVICES OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Second Respondent
THE ACTING SECTION HEAD OF PROCUREMENT
MANAGEMENT OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Third Respondent
THE BID EVALUATION COMMITTEE OF THE SOUTH
AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE
Fourth Respondent
THE BID ADJUDICATION COMMITTEE OF THE SOUTH
AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE
Fifth Respondent
ECM GROUP (PTY) LTD T/A ECM TECHNOLOGIES
Sixth Respondent
ACINO FORENSICS (PTY) LTD
Seventh Respondent
This judgment was prepared and authored by the Judge whose name is reflected and is handed down electronically by circulation to the Parties/their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines. The date for handing down is deemed to be 17 May 2024.
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
POTTERILL J
[1] I read the arguments before Tolmay J, the judgment, the applicant’s leave to appeal and the written heads submitted pertaining to the application for leave. I have also listened to argument.
[2] In terms of s17 of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 leave to appeal may only be given where a Judge is of the opinion that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success, or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard.
[3] There is no compelling reason why the appeal should be heard; I find no important points of law that warrant a consideration by a higher court.
[4] I am also unpersuaded that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success.
[5] The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel if so employed. Costs pertaining to work done after 1 April 2024 are awarded on scale C.
S. POTTERILL
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
CASE NO: 2023/046691 HEARD ON: 16 May 2024 FOR THE APPLICANT: ADV. S. GROBLER SC AND ADV. P. VOLMINK INSTRUCTED BY: Dirk Kotze Attorneys c/o Alant, Gell & Martin Inc. FOR THE 1ST TO 5TH RESPONDENTS: ADV. Z.Z. MATEBESE SC AND ADV. V. PILLAY INSTRUCTED BY: The State Attorney FOR THE 6TH RESPONDENT: ADV. C.M. RIP AND ADV. M. DU PLESSIS INSTRUCTED BY: Thompson Attorneys c/o Hack, Stupel & Ross Attorneys FOR THE 7TH RESPONDENT: ADV. R. MOULTRIE SC AND ADV. M.Z. GWALA INSTRUCTED BY: Webber Wentzel DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17 May 2024