D-Kon Development CC v Nwedamutswe N.O and Another (Leave to Appeal) (2016/23508) [2024] ZAGPPHC 22 (15 January 2024)

D-Kon Development CC v Nwedamutswe N.O and Another (Leave to Appeal) (2016/23508) [2024] ZAGPPHC 22 (15 January 2024)

The court found that all issues raised in the application for leave to appeal had already been addressed in the original judgment. After considering the submissions of both parties and the grounds advanced, the judge concluded that there are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The threshold set by section 17 of the Superior Courts Act was not met, and no compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 22
Parties
Plaintiff: D-Kon Development CC; Defendant: MJ Nwedamutswu N.O.; Defendant: TS Nwedamutswu N.O.
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 January 2024
Case Number
2016/23508
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Original Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mokose
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Prospects of Success 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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D-Kon Development CC

Plaintiff

MJ Nwedamutswu N.O.

Defendant

TS Nwedamutswu N.O.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Original Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants have demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act has been met.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all issues raised in the application for leave to appeal had already been addressed in the original judgment. After considering the submissions of both parties and the grounds advanced, the judge concluded that there are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The threshold set by section 17 of the Superior Courts Act was not met, and no compelling reasons were presented to justify granting leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.