Carstens NO and Others v Carstens (409/11) [2012] ZASCA 62 (10 May 2012)

Carstens NO and Others v Carstens (409/11) [2012] ZASCA 62 (10 May 2012)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order of the court a quo amounted to the dismissal of an exception, which is interlocutory in nature and therefore not appealable. The court relied on the authority of Maize Board v Tiger Oats Ltd and Zweni v Minister of Law and Order, which establish that only final orders...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] ZASCA 62
Parties
Appellant: Christiaan Louis Carstens NO; Appellant: Andries Johannes Daniel Bester NO; Appellant: Arno Strydom NO; Appellant: Vincent Cyril Tee NO; Appellant: Christiaan Louis Carstens; Respondent: Brigid Mary Carstens
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 May 2012
Case Number
409/11
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Struck Off the Roll
Outcome
Appeal struck off the roll; costs awarded against the appellants.
Judges
Brand, Cloete, Heher
Legal Topics
Appealability of Interlocutory Orders, Exception Dismissal, Costs on Appeal
Civil Procedure Appealability of Interlocutory Orders Exception Dismissal Costs on Appeal

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christiaan Louis Carstens NO

Appellant

Andries Johannes Daniel Bester NO

Appellant

Arno Strydom NO

Appellant

Vincent Cyril Tee NO

Appellant

Christiaan Louis Carstens

Appellant

Brigid Mary Carstens

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Struck Off the Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order dismissing the exception is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be entertained or struck off the roll.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order of the court a quo amounted to the dismissal of an exception, which is interlocutory in nature and therefore not appealable. The court relied on the authority of Maize Board v Tiger Oats Ltd and Zweni v Minister of Law and Order, which establish that only final orders are appealable. As the order in question did not dispose of any issue finally and could be revisited by the court of first instance, the appeal was not properly before the court and had to be struck off the roll.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck off the roll; costs awarded against the appellants.

Orders

  • The appeal is struck off the roll.
  • The Trust (represented by the first to fourth appellants) and the fifth appellant are ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of appeal jointly and severally.