Graspan Colliery SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (8420/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 98 (15 February 2021)

Graspan Colliery SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (8420/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 98 (15 February 2021)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. After considering the written heads of argument and hearing counsel, the judge concluded that there was no sound, rational basis to believe another court would reach a different conclusion. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed, and costs were awarded to the respondent, including the costs of two counsel.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 98
Parties
Applicant: Graspan Colliery SA (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 February 2021
Case Number
8420/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Original Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
C J Collis
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Costs of Two Counsel
Tax Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Costs of Two Counsel

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

Graspan Colliery SA (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Original Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there is any compelling reason for the appeal to be heard under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
  3. 3 Whether costs should include the costs of two counsel.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. After considering the written heads of argument and hearing counsel, the judge concluded that there was no sound, rational basis to believe another court would reach a different conclusion. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed, and costs were awarded to the respondent, including the costs of two counsel.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, such costs to include the costs of two counsel.