Incledon (Pty) Limited and Others v Slabbert and Others (J2237/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 164 (5 April 2017)

Incledon (Pty) Limited and Others v Slabbert and Others (J2237/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 164 (5 April 2017)

The court found that the applicants were entitled to withdraw the application, as there was no material prejudice or injustice to the respondents and no counter-application existed. Regarding costs, the court held that while the respondents' failure to disclose the non-competitive status of the sixth and seventh respondents in their initial response was unprofessional and could have avoided litigation, the applicants were alerted to this fact by the sixth respondent's attorney prior to filing the application and should have investigated further. In balancing the conduct of both parties, the court determined that the requirements of law and fairness were best served by each party bearing...

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 164
Parties
Applicant: Incledon (Pty) Limited; Applicant: Distribution and Warehousing Network Limited; Applicant: DPI Holdings (Pty) Limited; Applicant: DPI Plastics (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Slabbert, George; Respondent: Els, Gary; Respondent: Botha, Morne; Respondent: Sibanyoni, Sipho; Respondent: Evans, Johanita; Respondent: Kishugu Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Procure Point (Pty) Limited
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 April 2017
Case Number
J2237/16
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Withdrawal and Costs Order
Outcome
Application withdrawn by leave; no order as to costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Confidentiality Agreement, Costs Discretion, Withdrawal of Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Restraint of Trade Confidentiality Agreement Costs Discretion Withdrawal of Application

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Incledon (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Distribution and Warehousing Network Limited

Applicant

DPI Holdings (Pty) Limited

Applicant

DPI Plastics (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Slabbert, George

Respondent

Els, Gary

Respondent

Botha, Morne

Respondent

Sibanyoni, Sipho

Respondent

Evans, Johanita

Respondent

Kishugu Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procure Point (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Withdrawal and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted leave to withdraw the application against the first, second and fourth respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' conduct in failing to disclose material facts justifies a costs order against them.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of law and fairness warrant a costs order in favour of either party.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants were entitled to withdraw the application, as there was no material prejudice or injustice to the respondents and no counter-application existed. Regarding costs, the court held that while the respondents' failure to disclose the non-competitive status of the sixth and seventh respondents in their initial response was unprofessional and could have avoided litigation, the applicants were alerted to this fact by the sixth respondent's attorney prior to filing the application and should have investigated further. In balancing the conduct of both parties, the court determined that the requirements of law and fairness were best served by each party bearing...

Court Disposition

Application withdrawn by leave; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicants are granted leave to withdraw the application against the first, second and fourth respondents.
  • There is no order as to costs.