Deighton v Financial Sector Conduct Authority and Four Others (15703/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 556 (1 August 2022)

Deighton v Financial Sector Conduct Authority and Four Others (15703/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 556 (1 August 2022)

The court found that the respondents failed to conduct the investigation in a procedurally fair manner, as required by PAJA and the principles of natural justice. The applicant was entitled to receive relevant documents prior to questioning to ensure his responses were truthful and complete. The exclusion of the third, fourth, and fifth respondents was justified due to their lack of appropriate skills and expertise. The grounds advanced by the respondents for leave to appeal were considered and rejected, as there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion nor any compelling reason to grant leave to appeal. The judgment emphasized that all statutory...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 556
Parties
Applicant: Michael Edward Deighton; Respondent: Financial Sector Conduct Authority and Four Others
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2022
Case Number
15703/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Dated 8 July 2022
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Millar
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Review of Administrative Action, Natural Justice
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Procedural Fairness Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Review of Administrative Action Natural Justice

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Edward Deighton

Applicant

Financial Sector Conduct Authority and Four Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Dated 8 July 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the investigation and/or action undertaken against the applicant was procedurally unfair.
  2. 2 Whether the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA) applied to the investigation.
  3. 3 Whether there was a basis for excluding the third, fourth, and fifth respondents from further participation in the investigation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents failed to conduct the investigation in a procedurally fair manner, as required by PAJA and the principles of natural justice. The applicant was entitled to receive relevant documents prior to questioning to ensure his responses were truthful and complete. The exclusion of the third, fourth, and fifth respondents was justified due to their lack of appropriate skills and expertise. The grounds advanced by the respondents for leave to appeal were considered and rejected, as there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion nor any compelling reason to grant leave to appeal. The judgment emphasized that all statutory...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The respondents (applicants for leave to appeal) are ordered to pay the costs.