Ga- segonyana Munisipaliteit v Calitz (499/03) [2004] ZANCHC 16 (26 April 2004)

Ga- segonyana Munisipaliteit v Calitz (499/03) [2004] ZANCHC 16 (26 April 2004)

The court held that the application for leave to appeal was directed solely at the costs order made in the main application. In terms of section 21A of the Supreme Court Act and established judicial policy, appeals against costs orders only are discouraged unless exceptional circumstances are shown. The respondent failed to present any new arguments or exceptional circumstances that would justify interference with the costs order. The court found that its discretion in awarding costs was properly exercised, and that the respondent's conduct necessitated the proceedings. There are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion, nor are there exceptional...

Citation
[2004] ZANCHC 16
Parties
Applicant: Ga-Segonyana Munisipaliteit; Respondent: Calitz, JM
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 April 2004
Case Number
499/03
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against the costs order is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Lacock R
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Leave to Appeal, Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Costs Orders Leave to Appeal Judicial Discretion

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ga-Segonyana Munisipaliteit

Applicant

Calitz, JM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the costs order made in the main application.
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the costs order.
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify granting leave to appeal against a costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application for leave to appeal was directed solely at the costs order made in the main application. In terms of section 21A of the Supreme Court Act and established judicial policy, appeals against costs orders only are discouraged unless exceptional circumstances are shown. The respondent failed to present any new arguments or exceptional circumstances that would justify interference with the costs order. The court found that its discretion in awarding costs was properly exercised, and that the respondent's conduct necessitated the proceedings. There are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion, nor are there exceptional...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against the costs order is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal against the costs order herein is dismissed with costs.