Kabi v Kabi (Born Mofana) (4727/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 60 (26 February 2024)

Kabi v Kabi (Born Mofana) (4727/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 60 (26 February 2024)

The court found that both legal representatives were aware on 18 January 2024 that the respondent intended to oppose the application, yet neither informed the court, resulting in unnecessary costs for the hearing on 19 January 2024. The respondent's late filing of the Notice of Intention to Oppose, despite having been served with the application in November 2023, necessitated a condonation application. The court determined that the application should be removed from the roll, timelines set for the filing of further papers, and costs allocated such that the respondent pays the costs of 18 January 2024 on an unopposed basis, while each party bears their own costs for 19 January 2024 on an...

Citation
[2024] ZAFSHC 60
Parties
Applicant: Tumelo Octavia Kabi; Respondent: Utloanang Eunigar Kabi (Born Mofana)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 February 2024
Case Number
4727/2023
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Contempt of Court; Interlocutory Hearing on Costs and Postponement
Outcome
Application removed from the roll; timelines set for filing of affidavits and condonation application; costs allocated as per operative orders.
Judges
Van Zyl
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Costs Award, Postponement of Application, Condonation Application
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Costs Award Postponement of Application Condonation 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tumelo Octavia Kabi

Applicant

Utloanang Eunigar Kabi (Born Mofana)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Contempt of Court; Interlocutory Hearing on Costs and Postponement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for contempt of court should be removed from the roll due to procedural flaws.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's late filing of the Notice of Intention to Oppose warrants a condonation application.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the hearings on 18 and 19 January 2024.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both legal representatives were aware on 18 January 2024 that the respondent intended to oppose the application, yet neither informed the court, resulting in unnecessary costs for the hearing on 19 January 2024. The respondent's late filing of the Notice of Intention to Oppose, despite having been served with the application in November 2023, necessitated a condonation application. The court determined that the application should be removed from the roll, timelines set for the filing of further papers, and costs allocated such that the respondent pays the costs of 18 January 2024 on an unopposed basis, while each party bears their own costs for 19 January 2024 on an...

Court Disposition

Application removed from the roll; timelines set for filing of affidavits and condonation application; costs allocated as per operative orders.

Orders

  • The application is removed from the roll.
  • The respondent is to file her answering affidavit and condonation application for late filing of the Notice of Intention to Oppose within 15 days from the date of this order.