Kema and Another v National Horseracing Authority and Others (018291) [2014] ZACT 83 (16 October 2014)

Kema and Another v National Horseracing Authority and Others (018291) [2014] ZACT 83 (16 October 2014)

The Tribunal found that the applicants withdrew the matter without a tender of costs, thereby necessitating a determination of liability for wasted costs. Having considered the application by the second and third respondents, the Tribunal held that the applicants are jointly and severally liable for the wasted costs incurred by the second and third respondents. The costs are to be paid on a party and party scale and include the costs of two counsel. This order is justified by the withdrawal without a tender and the provisions of Tribunal Rule 50(3)(b).

Citation
[2014] ZACT 83
Parties
Applicant: Phindiwe Abegasl Kema; Applicant: Africa Race Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: National Horseracing Authority; Respondent: Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Ltd; Respondent: Gold Circle (Pty) Ltd
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 October 2014
Case Number
018291
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Costs Order Following Withdrawal of Application
Outcome
The applicants are ordered to pay the wasted costs of the second and third respondents, jointly and severally, on a party and party scale, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Y Carrim, A Wesseis, M Mokuena
Legal Topics
Costs Award, Withdrawal of Application, Party and Party Scale
Competition Law Costs Award Withdrawal of Application Party and Party Scale

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

Phindiwe Abegasl Kema

Applicant

Africa Race Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

National Horseracing Authority

Respondent

Phumelela Gaming and Leisure Ltd

Respondent

Gold Circle (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Costs Order Following Withdrawal of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are liable for the wasted costs of the second and third respondents following withdrawal of the application without a tender of costs.
  2. 2 On what scale the costs should be awarded and whether costs of two counsel are included.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicants withdrew the matter without a tender of costs, thereby necessitating a determination of liability for wasted costs. Having considered the application by the second and third respondents, the Tribunal held that the applicants are jointly and severally liable for the wasted costs incurred by the second and third respondents. The costs are to be paid on a party and party scale and include the costs of two counsel. This order is justified by the withdrawal without a tender and the provisions of Tribunal Rule 50(3)(b).

Court Disposition

The applicants are ordered to pay the wasted costs of the second and third respondents, jointly and severally, on a party and party scale, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The First and Second Applicants are jointly and severally liable to pay the wasted costs of the Second and Third Respondents, the one paying the other to be absolved.
  • The wasted costs are to be paid on a party and party scale, including the costs of two counsel.