In-Out Panelbeaters T/A Professional Panelbeaters v Mthonti (00731/13) [2013] ZAGPJHC 295 (19 August 2013)

In-Out Panelbeaters T/A Professional Panelbeaters v Mthonti (00731/13) [2013] ZAGPJHC 295 (19 August 2013)

The court found that the guarantee tendered by the respondent was adequate security, as it was issued by a reputable insurance company and there was no credible challenge to its validity. The applicant's conduct, including revoking acceptance of the guarantee, failing to produce the quotation, and challenging the authority of the respondent's attorneys, was deemed obstructive and contemptuous. The punitive attorney and client costs order was justified in light of this conduct. The court concluded that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal, either on the merits or regarding the costs order, and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Citation
[2013] ZAGPJHC 295
Parties
Applicant: In-Out Panelbeaters T/A Professional Panelbeaters; Respondent: Mthonti Sethabile Samukelisiwe
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 August 2013
Case Number
00731/13
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment on Adequacy of Security and Costs
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Weiner
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Security for Release of Property, Punitive Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Security for Release of Property Punitive 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

In-Out Panelbeaters T/A Professional Panelbeaters

Applicant

Mthonti Sethabile Samukelisiwe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment on Adequacy of Security and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding the adequacy of the security tendered by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the punitive attorney and client costs order against the applicant was justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the guarantee tendered by the respondent was adequate security, as it was issued by a reputable insurance company and there was no credible challenge to its validity. The applicant's conduct, including revoking acceptance of the guarantee, failing to produce the quotation, and challenging the authority of the respondent's attorneys, was deemed obstructive and contemptuous. The punitive attorney and client costs order was justified in light of this conduct. The court concluded that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal, either on the merits or regarding the costs order, and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.