Bouleigh 224 CC v Nedcor Bank Limited (15078/98) [1998] ZAGPHC 5 (31 August 1998)

Bouleigh 224 CC v Nedcor Bank Limited (15078/98) [1998] ZAGPHC 5 (31 August 1998)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on any of the grounds previously decided in favour of the respondent. The judge was satisfied that his discretion regarding the costs order, including the engagement of two counsel, was properly exercised and that there was no misdirection. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Citation
[1998] ZAGPHC 5
Parties
Applicant: Bouleigh 224 CC; Respondent: Nedcor Bank Limited
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 August 1998
Case Number
15078/98
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Willis
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Costs Award, Reasonable Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs Award Reasonable Prospects of Success

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bouleigh 224 CC

Applicant

Nedcor Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success in an appeal against the judgment previously delivered.
  2. 2 Whether the costs order, including the engagement of two counsel, should be reconsidered on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on any of the grounds previously decided in favour of the respondent. The judge was satisfied that his discretion regarding the costs order, including the engagement of two counsel, was properly exercised and that there was no misdirection. The application for leave to appeal was therefore 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 with costs, which costs are to include the costs consequent upon the engagement of two counsel.