Khosa and Another (2996/2019), Ex parte [2019] ZAFSHC 140 (29 August 2019)

Khosa and Another (2996/2019), Ex parte [2019] ZAFSHC 140 (29 August 2019)

The court held that the application was fatally defective due to the failure to cite and notify the Departments of Treasury and Social Development, who have a substantial interest in the relief sought. The applicant's justification for not giving notice, based on alleged threats to her life, was unsupported by any factual basis. The repeated filing of ex parte urgent applications on the same issue, despite previous dismissals for lack of notice and urgency, demonstrated disregard for procedural requirements. The court concluded that justice required affected parties to be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before any relief could be granted. Accordingly, the application was...

Citation
[2019] ZAFSHC 140
Parties
Applicant: Masaingita Abigail Khosa; Applicant: Hlanganani Sandile Nxumalo
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2019
Case Number
2996/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Ex Parte Application for Urgent Relief
Outcome
Application struck off the roll. Applicant barred from bringing further proceedings for similar relief without proper notice.
Judges
P.E. Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Ex Parte Applications, Joinder of Parties, Notice of Motion, Urgent Interdicts
Civil Procedure Ex Parte Applications Joinder of Parties Notice of Motion Urgent Interdicts

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Masaingita Abigail Khosa

Applicant

Hlanganani Sandile Nxumalo

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Ex Parte Application for Urgent Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application may be heard on an ex parte basis without notice to affected parties.
  2. 2 Whether the Departments of Treasury and Social Development should have been joined as respondents.
  3. 3 Whether the application is urgent and justifies deviation from standard notice requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application was fatally defective due to the failure to cite and notify the Departments of Treasury and Social Development, who have a substantial interest in the relief sought. The applicant's justification for not giving notice, based on alleged threats to her life, was unsupported by any factual basis. The repeated filing of ex parte urgent applications on the same issue, despite previous dismissals for lack of notice and urgency, demonstrated disregard for procedural requirements. The court concluded that justice required affected parties to be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before any relief could be granted. Accordingly, the application was...

Court Disposition

Application struck off the roll. Applicant barred from bringing further proceedings for similar relief without proper notice.

Orders

  • The application is struck off the roll.
  • The applicant may not bring any proceedings in this Court or any other Court or tribunal within the Republic of South Africa for the relief presently sought or any relief sought unless and until the papers have been served upon those who ought to receive notice of the application.