Campbell N.O and Another v Fourie and Others (879/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 283 (25 November 2021)

Campbell N.O and Another v Fourie and Others (879/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 283 (25 November 2021)

The court found that the removal of the 1st Plaintiff as a party to the main action would have no practical effect or result, as the 2nd Plaintiff's locus standi was not disputed and the action could proceed regardless. Therefore, the requirements for leave to appeal under Section 17 of the Superior Courts Act were not satisfied, and there was no reasonable prospect that another court would uphold the appeal. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 283
Parties
Applicant: Malcolm Neil Campbell N.O.; Applicant: Vrystaat Munisipale Pensioenfonds; Respondent: Fritz Fourie; Respondent: Elana Steenkamp; Respondent: Eurika Poolman
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 November 2021
Case Number
879/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Special Plea
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
P. J. Loubser
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Leave to Appeal, Special Plea, Practical Effect, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Locus Standi Leave to Appeal Special Plea Practical Effect 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malcolm Neil Campbell N.O.

Applicant

Vrystaat Munisipale Pensioenfonds

Applicant

Fritz Fourie

Respondent

Elana Steenkamp

Respondent

Eurika Poolman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Special Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the removal of the 1st Plaintiff as a party would have any practical effect or result on the main action.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the dismissal of the special plea of no locus standi.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of Section 17 of the Superior Courts Act for granting leave to appeal are met.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the removal of the 1st Plaintiff as a party to the main action would have no practical effect or result, as the 2nd Plaintiff's locus standi was not disputed and the action could proceed regardless. Therefore, the requirements for leave to appeal under Section 17 of the Superior Courts Act were not satisfied, and there was no reasonable prospect that another court would uphold the appeal. 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 with costs, including the costs of two counsel.