Economic Freedom Fighters (Pty) Ltd and Others v Gas Giants CC and Another (13850/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 613 (13 June 2025)
After considering the evidence, the judgment of Justice Sardiwala, the grounds for leave to appeal, and the arguments of both parties, the court found that there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion on the merits and law. The respondents conceded leave for the third applicant,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] ZAGPPHC 613
- Parties
- Applicant: Economic Freedom Fighters (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Khutso Segage; Applicant: Agree Mathebula; Applicant: Matome Solomon Masipa; Respondent: Gas Giants CC; Respondent: Well of Life (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 13850/2022
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted to all applicants to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Pretoria. Costs will be costs in the appeal.
- Judges
- Strijdom
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Superior Courts Act, Costs in Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Economic Freedom Fighters (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Khutso Segage
Applicant
Agree Mathebula
Applicant
Matome Solomon Masipa
Applicant
Gas Giants CC
Respondent
Well of Life (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the whole of the judgment and order of Justice Sardiwala.
- 2 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion on the merits and law.
- 3 Whether there is any compelling reason for the appeal to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi
After considering the evidence, the judgment of Justice Sardiwala, the grounds for leave to appeal, and the arguments of both parties, the court found that there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion on the merits and law. The respondents conceded leave for the third applicant, and the court determined that leave should be granted for all applicants to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Pretoria. Costs are to be costs in the appeal.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted to all applicants to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Pretoria. Costs will be costs in the appeal.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted in respect of all the applicants to a Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Pretoria.
- Costs will be costs in the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
47 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH-AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
Case Number: 13850/2022
Heard on: 29 June 2025
Judgment: 13 June 2025
(1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED: YES/NO
DATE 13 June 2025
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
THE ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS
First Applicant
(PTY) LTD
KHUTSO SEGAGE
Second Applicant
AGREE MATHEBULA
Third Applicant
MATOME SOLOMON MASIPA
Fourth Applicant
and
GAS GIANTS CC
First Respondent
WELL OF LIFE (PTY) LTD
Second Respondent
JUDGMENT
STRIJDOM, J
[1] In this matter the applicants apply for leave to appeal to the Full Court of this division against the whole of the judgment and order of Justice Sardiwala, which was delivered on 31 August 2023 with case number 13850/2022.
[2] The application is opposed by the respondents. However, the respondents conceded that leave must be granted to the third applicant.
[3] The grounds of appeal are set out in the application for leave to appeal. I do not intend to repeat same.
[4] Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 provide 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 judgments on the matter under consideration.
[5] In respect of the application for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment, the applicants raised as grounds a challenge to every finding made in the judgment.
[6] I have considered the evidence, the judgment of Justice Sardiwala, the grounds upon which this application for leave to appeal has been brought and the arguments advanced by the parties.
[7] I have also considered the reasons for the judgment and am of the view that there is a reasonable prospect that another Court would come to a different conclusion on the merits and law.
[8] Under the circumstances, it is ordered that:
8.1 Leave to appeal is granted in respect of all the applicants to a Full Court of the Gauteng Division Pretoria.
8.2 Costs will be costs in the appeal.
JJ STRIJDOM
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
For the Applicants:
Adv. F Sangoni
Instructed by:
Ian Levitt Attorneys
For the first and second Respondent: Adv. Mouton
De Jager Inc Attorneys