Joubert v Drotsky (AR9/2023) [2024] ZAKZPHC 72 (30 August 2024)

Joubert v Drotsky (AR9/2023) [2024] ZAKZPHC 72 (30 August 2024)

The appellant failed to provide a full and satisfactory explanation for the year-long delay in filing her notice of appeal. Her affidavit was vague, omitted key dates, and did not account for the entire period. The explanation regarding attempts to raise funds was insufficient and unsupported by detail. Furthermore, her prospects of success were poor, as she did not discharge the onus of proving the payment was a gift, and her arguments regarding the Afrikaans statement and procedural irregularity were unfounded. The affidavit supporting condonation was improperly commissioned by her own counsel, contrary to regulations. In light of the inadequate explanation, poor prospects of success,...

Citation
[2024] ZAKZPHC 72
Parties
Appellant: Christa Joubert; Respondent: Jurie Johannes Drotsky
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 August 2024
Case Number
AR9/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court, Durban; Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Condonation for late filing of the notice of appeal refused; appeal struck from the roll.
Judges
Mossop, Mngadi
Legal Topics
Condonation, Late Filing of Appeal, Finality of Litigation, Onus of Proof, Commissioner of Oaths Regulation
Civil Procedure Condonation Late Filing of Appeal Finality of Litigation Onus of Proof Commissioner of Oaths Regulation

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christa Joubert

Appellant

Jurie Johannes Drotsky

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court, Durban; Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Notice of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the appellant's notice of appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant has provided a full and satisfactory explanation for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to provide a full and satisfactory explanation for the year-long delay in filing her notice of appeal. Her affidavit was vague, omitted key dates, and did not account for the entire period. The explanation regarding attempts to raise funds was insufficient and unsupported by detail. Furthermore, her prospects of success were poor, as she did not discharge the onus of proving the payment was a gift, and her arguments regarding the Afrikaans statement and procedural irregularity were unfounded. The affidavit supporting condonation was improperly commissioned by her own counsel, contrary to regulations. In light of the inadequate explanation, poor prospects of success,...

Court Disposition

Condonation for late filing of the notice of appeal refused; appeal struck from the roll.

Orders

  • The appellant’s application for condonation for the late filing of her notice of appeal is refused.
  • The appeal is struck from the roll.