Elizabeth Johanna Liebenberg v Hendrik Johannes Christiaan Liebenberg (3254/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 166 (6 June 2025)

Elizabeth Johanna Liebenberg v Hendrik Johannes Christiaan Liebenberg (3254/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 166 (6 June 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success for the appeal. The grounds of appeal did not raise any compelling reasons or conflicting judgments that would justify granting leave to appeal. The applicant is bound by the existing court order, and the conduct of non-payment is contemptuous. New issues raised in the heads of argument are not permissible. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 166
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Johanna Liebenberg; Respondent: Hendrik Johannes Christiaan Liebenberg
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2025
Case Number
3254/2024
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Considered in Chambers
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mpama AJ
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospects of Success Superior Courts Act 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Johanna Liebenberg

Applicant

Hendrik Johannes Christiaan Liebenberg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Considered in Chambers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons, including conflicting judgments, to grant leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds of appeal raised by the applicant justify reconsideration by another court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success for the appeal. The grounds of appeal did not raise any compelling reasons or conflicting judgments that would justify granting leave to appeal. The applicant is bound by the existing court order, and the conduct of non-payment is contemptuous. New issues raised in the heads of argument are not permissible. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on Scale B as contemplated under rule 67A of the Uniform Rules of the Court.