Hesketh v Koekemoer and Others (5900/2008) [2022] ZAFSHC 349 (14 December 2022)

Hesketh v Koekemoer and Others (5900/2008) [2022] ZAFSHC 349 (14 December 2022)

The court found that the applicant's Heads of Argument were filed late by only four days, and no party was prejudiced by the delay. In the interests of justice, condonation was granted. The court considered the grounds for leave to appeal and the submissions made, including the allegation of a close relationship between the judge and Me Rochelle Brink. The court held that the applicant's allegations did not establish a reasonable apprehension of bias or justify recusal. Upon reviewing the reasons for the original order, the court concluded that the application for leave to appeal was without merit, as there were no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason for the appeal to...

Citation
[2022] ZAFSHC 349
Parties
Applicant: Bernadette Marion Hesketh; Respondent: Hanré Koekemoer; Respondent: Johan George Lochner van der Schyff; Respondent: Koekemoer van der Schyff CC
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Case Number
5900/2008
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, Following Dismissal of Initial Application and Delivery of Reasons.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs. Condonation for late filing of Heads of Argument granted.
Judges
De Kock
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Recusal, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Condonation Recusal Costs Order

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

Bernadette Marion Hesketh

Applicant

Hanré Koekemoer

Respondent

Johan George Lochner van der Schyff

Respondent

Koekemoer van der Schyff CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, Following Dismissal of Initial Application and Delivery of Reasons.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the applicant's Heads of Argument in the leave to appeal application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  3. 3 Whether there are compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's Heads of Argument were filed late by only four days, and no party was prejudiced by the delay. In the interests of justice, condonation was granted. The court considered the grounds for leave to appeal and the submissions made, including the allegation of a close relationship between the judge and Me Rochelle Brink. The court held that the applicant's allegations did not establish a reasonable apprehension of bias or justify recusal. Upon reviewing the reasons for the original order, the court concluded that the application for leave to appeal was without merit, as there were no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason for the appeal to...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs. Condonation for late filing of Heads of Argument granted.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted to the applicant for the late filing of her Heads of Argument pertaining to the application for leave to appeal under case number 5900/2008.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs occasioned by the application for condonation.