Giyani Engineering and Consulting CC and Others v Map Civil and Landscaping CC and Others (95141/2015) [2019] ZAGPPHC 968 (5 December 2019)

Giyani Engineering and Consulting CC and Others v Map Civil and Landscaping CC and Others (95141/2015) [2019] ZAGPPHC 968 (5 December 2019)

The court found that the Applicants repeatedly enrolled and removed urgent applications, causing wasted costs and financial prejudice to the Respondents. The Applicants failed to tender costs when removing matters from the roll and engaged in conduct bordering on vexatious litigation. The Respondents made reasonable efforts to resolve the costs amicably, but the Applicants persisted in ill-considered litigation. The court held that the Respondents had established a proper case for the relief sought and ordered the Applicants to pay the reserved and wasted costs, jointly and severally, as detailed in the order.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 968
Parties
Applicant: Giyani Engineering and Consulting CC; Applicant: Giyani Gloria Mhlanga; Applicant: Calvin Mutize; Respondent: MAP Civil and Landscaping CC; Respondent: Bridget Thandeka Duma; Respondent: Moses Mapolisa
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 December 2019
Case Number
95141/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Determination of Reserved and Outstanding Costs Following Urgent Applications and Interlocutory Proceedings.
Outcome
Application granted. Costs awarded against the First to Third Applicants, jointly and severally, for reserved and wasted costs as specified.
Judges
G.T. Avvakoumides
Legal Topics
Costs Awards, Urgent Application, Wasted Costs, Vexatious Litigation
Civil Procedure Costs Awards Urgent Application Wasted Costs Vexatious Litigation

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Giyani Engineering and Consulting CC

Applicant

Giyani Gloria Mhlanga

Applicant

Calvin Mutize

Applicant

MAP Civil and Landscaping CC

Respondent

Bridget Thandeka Duma

Respondent

Moses Mapolisa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Determination of Reserved and Outstanding Costs Following Urgent Applications and Interlocutory Proceedings.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who is liable for the costs reserved and wasted in various urgent applications between August and September 2016.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicants' conduct in repeatedly enrolling and removing applications constitutes vexatious litigation warranting adverse costs.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondents are entitled to costs for preparation and appearance in respect of the disputed applications.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Applicants repeatedly enrolled and removed urgent applications, causing wasted costs and financial prejudice to the Respondents. The Applicants failed to tender costs when removing matters from the roll and engaged in conduct bordering on vexatious litigation. The Respondents made reasonable efforts to resolve the costs amicably, but the Applicants persisted in ill-considered litigation. The court held that the Respondents had established a proper case for the relief sought and ordered the Applicants to pay the reserved and wasted costs, jointly and severally, as detailed in the order.

Court Disposition

Application granted. Costs awarded against the First to Third Applicants, jointly and severally, for reserved and wasted costs as specified.

Orders

  • The First to Third Applicants must pay the costs of the application in case number 95141/2015, jointly and severally, the one paying, the others to be absolved.
  • Costs reserved on 2 and 3 August 2016 are awarded against the Applicants.