Intergrated Commodities Company (Pty) Ltd v Kalinda Trading CC (19798/20) [2024] ZAGPPHC 143 (21 February 2024)

Intergrated Commodities Company (Pty) Ltd v Kalinda Trading CC (19798/20) [2024] ZAGPPHC 143 (21 February 2024)

The court found that the order compelling delivery of documents under Rule 35(3) is interlocutory and not final in nature. Delivery of the documents does not dispose of the main proceedings, nor does it have a definitive effect on the parties' rights. The order is procedural and susceptible to alteration by the trial court. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the order meets the criteria for appealability as set out in Zweni v Minister of Law and Order. Furthermore, the applicant did not show any reasonable prospect of success on appeal as required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 143
Parties
Applicant: Intergrated Commodities Company (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Kalinda Trading CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 February 2024
Case Number
19798/20
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Baqwa
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Appealability, Rule 35 Discovery, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Interlocutory Orders Appealability Rule 35 Discovery Leave to Appeal Costs Award

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intergrated Commodities Company (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Kalinda Trading CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order compelling delivery of documents under Rule 35(3) is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal as required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the order compelling delivery of documents under Rule 35(3) is interlocutory and not final in nature. Delivery of the documents does not dispose of the main proceedings, nor does it have a definitive effect on the parties' rights. The order is procedural and susceptible to alteration by the trial court. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the order meets the criteria for appealability as set out in Zweni v Minister of Law and Order. Furthermore, the applicant did not show any reasonable prospect of success on appeal as required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.