Eco Africa Investments (Pty) Ltd v Snappy Chef Trading (Pty) Limited (10135/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 153 (16 February 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The judge had previously provided comprehensive reasons for dismissing the main application and addressed all issues raised by the applicant. Applying the heightened threshold under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] ZAGPJHC 153
- Parties
- Applicant: Eco Africa Investments (Pty) Limited t/a Snappy Chef (WC) E Botswana; Respondent: Snappy Chef Trading (Pty) Limited
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 10135/2021
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- Strijdom
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act, Costs Award
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Eco Africa Investments (Pty) Limited t/a Snappy Chef (WC) E Botswana
Applicant
Snappy Chef Trading (Pty) Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted to the Full Court of the division.
- 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
- 3 Whether there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The judge had previously provided comprehensive reasons for dismissing the main application and addressed all issues raised by the applicant. Applying the heightened threshold under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act and the Mont Chevaux Trust precedent, the court concluded that there is no certainty that another court would reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH-AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISON, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 10135/2021
(1) REPORTABLE: NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED.
DATE 16/02/2023
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
ECO AFRICA INVESTMENTS
APPLICANT
(PTY) LIMITED T/A SNAPPY
CHEF (WC) E BOTSWANA
AND
SNAPPY CHEF TRADING
RESPONDENT
(PTY) LIMITED
JUDGMENT
(APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
STRIJDOM AJ
1. This is an application for leave to appeal my judgement handed down on 7 November 2022 wherein the main application was dismissed with costs.
2. Leave to appeal is sought to the Full Court of this division.
3. The applicant’s grounds of appeal are summarily set out in their application for leave to appeal.
4. Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 provides that leave to appeal may only be granted where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success, or if there is some compelling reason why the appeal should be heard including conflicting judgements on the matter under consideration.
5. Each application for leave to appeal must be decided on its own facts.
6. The Superior Courts Act has raised the bar for granting leave to appeal in the Mont Chevaux Trust (IT 2012/28) v Tina Goosen and 18 others. The court held as follows:
‘It is clear that the threshold for granting leave to appeal against a judgement of a High Court has been raised in the new Act. The former test whether leave to appeal should be granted was a reasonable prospect that another court might come to a different conclusion. The use of the word ‘would’ in the new statute indicated a measure of certainty that another court will differ from the court whose judgement is sought to be appealed against.’
7. In my reasons for judgement, I properly dealt with all the issues raised by the applicant and gave comprehensive reasons for the findings.
8. Having considered the grounds of appeal and submissions made by the parties, I am of the view that there are no reasonable prospects of success that another court would come to a different conclusion.
9. In the result the application for leave to appeal in dismissed with costs.
ACTING JUDGE OF THE
HIGH COURT OF SOUTH
AFRICA GAUTENG
DIVISION JOHANNESBURG