Heppell v Law Society for the Northern Provinces (A220/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 176 (26 February 2016)

Heppell v Law Society for the Northern Provinces (A220/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 176 (26 February 2016)

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. The litigation commenced before the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 came into operation, but judgment in the main application was delivered after the Act commenced. Section 52(1) of the new Act excludes from its operation only those cases where judgment had not yet been delivered at the time of commencement. The main application was no longer pending once judgment was delivered, and subsequent appeal proceedings are sui generis. The new Act applies to the appeal, and under its provisions, the full court does not have jurisdiction to hear appeals from a full bench. The only order the court could issue was to remove the...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 176
Parties
Appellant: Warrick Lesley Visser Heppell; Respondent: Law Society for the Northern Provinces
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 February 2016
Case Number
A220/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Jurisdictional Determination Prior to Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal removed from the roll due to lack of jurisdiction.
Judges
FHD Van Oosten, DS Molefe, MM Jansen
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Full Court, Application of Supreme Court Act, Application of Superior Courts Act, Pending Cases Definition
Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Full Court Application of Supreme Court Act Application of Superior Courts Act Pending Cases Definition

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Warrick Lesley Visser Heppell

Appellant

Law Society for the Northern Provinces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Jurisdictional Determination Prior to Hearing of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the full court have jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal?
  2. 2 Which statutory regime applies: the Supreme Court Act 59 of 1959 or the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013?
  3. 3 Does the definition of 'pending cases' in the new Act extend to appeals after judgment in the main application?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the appeal. The litigation commenced before the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 came into operation, but judgment in the main application was delivered after the Act commenced. Section 52(1) of the new Act excludes from its operation only those cases where judgment had not yet been delivered at the time of commencement. The main application was no longer pending once judgment was delivered, and subsequent appeal proceedings are sui generis. The new Act applies to the appeal, and under its provisions, the full court does not have jurisdiction to hear appeals from a full bench. The only order the court could issue was to remove the...

Court Disposition

Appeal removed from the roll due to lack of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • The appeal is removed from the roll.