Just Splendid (Pty) Ltd and Another v Khunou and Others (2023/103030) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1175 (17 October 2023)

Just Splendid (Pty) Ltd and Another v Khunou and Others (2023/103030) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1175 (17 October 2023)

The court found that the application constituted an abuse of process. The founding papers were incomplete, lacking necessary annexures, and failed to adequately address urgency. The applicants delayed service without explanation and did not inform the court of prior proceedings before another judge. The relief sought was inappropriate in several respects. The application could have been served earlier, and no case for ex parte relief was made. The court concluded that the matter should be struck from the roll and that punitive costs were warranted due to the applicants' conduct.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1175
Parties
Applicant: Just Splendid (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Bontle Cornelia Khunou; Respondent: Onica Khunou; Respondent: Tshepo Abram Phiri; Respondent: Life Partners Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Velosa & Associates Inc; Respondent: Companies and Intellectual Property Commission
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 October 2023
Case Number
2023/103030
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Strike From the Roll in Urgent Court
Outcome
Application struck from the roll with punitive costs against the second applicant.
Judges
Moorcroft
Legal Topics
Urgent Interdict, Removal of Director, Abuse of Process, Service of Process
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Urgent Interdict Removal of Director Abuse of Process Service of Process

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Just Splendid (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Bontle Cornelia Khunou

Applicant

Onica Khunou

Respondent

Tshepo Abram Phiri

Respondent

Life Partners Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Velosa & Associates Inc

Respondent

Companies and Intellectual Property Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Strike From the Roll in Urgent Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to interdict the shareholders' meeting is urgent and properly before the court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have abused the process of court by their conduct in launching the application.
  3. 3 Whether the application should be struck from the roll and costs awarded on a punitive scale.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application constituted an abuse of process. The founding papers were incomplete, lacking necessary annexures, and failed to adequately address urgency. The applicants delayed service without explanation and did not inform the court of prior proceedings before another judge. The relief sought was inappropriate in several respects. The application could have been served earlier, and no case for ex parte relief was made. The court concluded that the matter should be struck from the roll and that punitive costs were warranted due to the applicants' conduct.

Court Disposition

Application struck from the roll with punitive costs against the second applicant.

Orders

  • The application is struck from the roll.
  • The second applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application on the scale as between attorney and own client.