Dwane and Another v Minister of State Security Agency and Others (11889/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 102 (12 February 2024)

Dwane and Another v Minister of State Security Agency and Others (11889/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 102 (12 February 2024)

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the threshold required for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds advanced by the applicants were either adequately addressed in the original judgment, vague, or unsupported by concise reasons or evidence. The court held that the authority issues had been properly considered, and the applicants' concession regarding the replying affidavit further weakened their grounds. The procedural unfairness argument was not relevant to the judicial review of the sanction and outcome of the appeal process. The applicants did not provide sufficient reasons to challenge the costs order. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 102
Parties
Applicant: Kganki France Dwane; Applicant: Bamaketse Surprise Batleng; Respondent: Minister of State Security Agency; Respondent: Acting Director General State Security Agency; Respondent: Advocate S.J. Coetzee
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 February 2024
Case Number
11889/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Retief
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Authority to Oppose, Costs Award, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Leave to Appeal Authority to Oppose Costs Award Judicial Review Procedural Fairness

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kganki France Dwane

Applicant

Bamaketse Surprise Batleng

Applicant

Minister of State Security Agency

Respondent

Acting Director General State Security Agency

Respondent

Advocate S.J. Coetzee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have met the threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the court erred in its findings regarding authority to oppose and authority of the deponent.
  3. 3 Whether the court erred in dismissing the application on an opposed basis.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the threshold required for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds advanced by the applicants were either adequately addressed in the original judgment, vague, or unsupported by concise reasons or evidence. The court held that the authority issues had been properly considered, and the applicants' concession regarding the replying affidavit further weakened their grounds. The procedural unfairness argument was not relevant to the judicial review of the sanction and outcome of the appeal process. The applicants did not provide sufficient reasons to challenge the costs order. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicants are granted leave to amend the application for leave to appeal to clearly incorporate reference to Retief AJ.
  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.