Financial Sector Conduct Authority v Tjiroze (3745/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 365 (8 August 2019)

Financial Sector Conduct Authority v Tjiroze (3745/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 365 (8 August 2019)

The court found that the order appealed against was not a final judgment and did not dispose of the real issues between the parties, but was merely a leave to amend to correct a typographical error. The applicant failed to demonstrate that another court would differ from the order appealed against or that there was a reasonable prospect of success. The correction made by the court was within its authority as it concerned a clerical error and did not alter the substance of the judgment. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 365
Parties
Applicant: Financial Sector Conduct Authority; Respondent: Hitjevi Obafemi Tjiroze
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 August 2019
Case Number
3745/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Order Dated 15 February 2019
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
M.L. Senyatsi
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Amendment of Pleadings, Final Judgment, Clerical Error Correction
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Amendment of Pleadings Final Judgment Clerical Error Correction

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Financial Sector Conduct Authority

Applicant

Hitjevi Obafemi Tjiroze

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Order Dated 15 February 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granting leave to amend the pleading is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has met the threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.
  3. 3 Whether the court was entitled to correct or revise its judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the order appealed against was not a final judgment and did not dispose of the real issues between the parties, but was merely a leave to amend to correct a typographical error. The applicant failed to demonstrate that another court would differ from the order appealed against or that there was a reasonable prospect of success. The correction made by the court was within its authority as it concerned a clerical error and did not alter the substance of the judgment. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal against the order made on 15 February 2019 is dismissed with costs.