Blackboard Media (Pty) Ltd and Others v Municipality of the City of Cape Town (23056/09) [2010] ZAWCHC 190; ; [2010] 4 All SA 197 (WCC) (13 August 2010)
- Citation
- [2010] ZAWCHC 190
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Panel
- Fourie
- Case number
- 23056/09
More details
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Panel
- Fourie
- Case number
- 23056/09
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that any order made on appeal would have no practical effect or result, as the relief sought pertained to advertising opportunities during the 2010 Fifa World Cup, which had already concluded. There were no exceptional circumstances regarding costs that would justify granting leave to appeal on that basis. Furthermore, the court determined that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion on the issues previously decided. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Court disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application, including the costs of two counsel.
02
Material facts
Parties
Blackboard Media (Pty) Ltd
ApplicantTractor Outdoor (Pty) Ltd
ApplicantCK Outdoor Advertising (Pty) Ltd
ApplicantMunicipality of the City of Cape Town
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicants have a reasonable prospect of success on appeal.
- 02
Whether any order made on appeal would have a practical effect or result.
- 03
Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify an appeal on costs only.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants contend that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment handed down on 18 December 2009. They seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, arguing that the relief sought in their amended notice of motion remains relevant and that the issues determined by the court warrant reconsideration.
- Respondent
- The respondent opposes the application, arguing that any order made on appeal would have no practical effect or result, as the advertising opportunities related to the 2010 Fifa World Cup have already passed. The respondent further submits that there are no exceptional circumstances justifying an appeal on costs only and that there is no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 21(A) of the Supreme Court Act, No. 59 of 1959
An applicant for leave to appeal must satisfy the court that there is a reasonable prospect of success on appeal.
- 02
Section 21(A)(1) of the Supreme Court Act, No. 59 of 1959
If a judgment or order sought on appeal will have no practical effect or result, the appeal may be dismissed on this ground alone.
- 03
Section 21(A)(3) of the Supreme Court Act, No. 59 of 1959
The question of whether a judgment or order would have no practical effect or result is to be determined without reference to costs, except in exceptional circumstances.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that any order made on appeal would have no practical effect or result, as the relief sought pertained to advertising opportunities during the 2010 Fifa World Cup, which had already concluded. There were no exceptional circumstances regarding costs that would justify granting leave to appeal on that basis. Furthermore, the court determined that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion on the issues previously decided. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Obiter and limits
- The court noted that the determination of practical effect or result must be made without reference to costs, except in exceptional circumstances.
- The court observed that the passage of time and the conclusion of the 2010 Fifa World Cup rendered the relief sought moot.
Court disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application, including the costs of two counsel.
Source and reliance status
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Judgment
IN
THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE, HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN)
CASE NUMBER: 23056/09
DATE: 13
AUGUST 2010
In the matter between:
BLACKBOARD MEDIA (PTY) LTD 1st Applicant
TRACTOR OUTDOOR (PTY) LTD 2nd Applicant
CK OUTDOOR ADVERTISING (PTY) LTD 3rd Applicant
and
THE
MUNICIPALITY OF THE
CITY OF CAPE TOWN Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Application for leave to appeal)
FOURIE. J:
The applicants seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole of my judgment handed down on 18 December 2009.
The application is opposed.
It is trite that in an application of this nature an applicant has to satisfy the Court that it has a reasonable prospect of success on appeal. In addition the provisions of section 21(A) of the Supreme Court Act, No. 59 of 1959, are to be borne in mind. Section 21(A)(1) provides that when at the hearing of a civil appeal the issues are of such a nature that a judgment or order sought wilt have no practical effect or result, the appeal may be dismissed on this ground alone.
Section 21(A)(3) further provides that save under exceptional circumstances the question whether a judgment or order would have no practical effect or result, is to be determined without reference to consideration of costs.
It appears to me that any order which may be made on appeal will have no practical effect or result. The relief sought in applicants' amended notice of motion, pertains to measures and/or steps taken by respondent in terms of Annexure R3 to the founding papers. Annexure R3 was a communication sent to prospective advertisers by respondent's agent in order to provide them with information
pertaining to the signage opportunities in Cape Town during the 2010 Fifa World Cup. The World Cup and advertising opportunities relating thereto have come and gone with the result that any order which the Supreme Court of Appeal may make, will in my opinion have no practical effect or result. This is also not a case where considerable costs have been incurred which could constitute
exceptional circumstances justifying an appeal on the issue of costs only.
I have also considered the application on its merits, in my view there is no reasonable prospect that another Court will come to a different conclusion on the issues determined by me.
In the result the application for leave to APPEAL
IS DISMISSED WITH COSTS, including the costs of two counsel.
FOURIE. J
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.