Khunou v Life Patterns Holdings (Pty) Limited and Others (2024/026439) [2024] ZAGPJHC 995 (4 October 2024)

Khunou v Life Patterns Holdings (Pty) Limited and Others (2024/026439) [2024] ZAGPJHC 995 (4 October 2024)

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the order sought to be appealed was interim and not final, thus not appealable. The grounds of appeal raised by the applicant were either irrelevant, misconceived, or did not constitute valid bases for appeal. The court found that the applicant failed to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 995
Parties
Applicant: Bontle Cornelia Khunou; Respondent: Life Patterns Holdings (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Onica Khunou; Respondent: Tshepo Abram Phiri
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 October 2024
Case Number
2024/026439
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interim Urgent Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
B. C. Wanless
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Interim Interdict, Costs Order, Urgency Ruling
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Interim Interdict Costs Order Urgency Ruling

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bontle Cornelia Khunou

Applicant

Life Patterns Holdings (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Onica Khunou

Respondent

Tshepo Abram Phiri

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interim Urgent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against an interim urgent order.
  2. 2 Whether the grounds of appeal raised by the applicant constitute valid bases for appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the costs order granted in the urgent application is appealable.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the order sought to be appealed was interim and not final, thus not appealable. The grounds of appeal raised by the applicant were either irrelevant, misconceived, or did not constitute valid bases for appeal. The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that another court would reach a different decision. The court also held that no unusual circumstances existed to warrant a departure from the principle that costs follow the result, and ordered the applicant to pay costs on an attorney and client scale.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal against the order of this Court under case number 2024-026439, granted on an urgent basis on 20 March 2024, is dismissed.
  • The applicant, Bontle Cornelia Khunou, is to pay the costs of this application on the scale of attorney and client.