Khunou v Sebesho and Another In re: Sebesho v Khunou and Another (24798/17) [2021] ZAGPJHC 429 (13 September 2021)
The court found that the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in launching the rescission application and demonstrated a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter, namely her home, which she claims as sole heir. The exception to the second motion was properly filed and opposed, indicating that the matter was not unopposed. The court held that the order was erroneously sought and granted in the absence of the applicant, as the exception was still to be argued and the applicant was denied an opportunity to be heard. The applicant was entitled to condonation for the late filing, and the rescission of the order was warranted to allow the matter to be properly...
- Citation
- [2021] ZAGPJHC 429
- Parties
- Applicant: JA Khunou (Known as Mofedi, Maki); Respondent: PK Sebesho; Respondent: Master of the High Court (Johannesburg)
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 13 September 2021
- Case Number
- 24798/17
- Procedural Posture
- Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Judgment Granted on 22 August 2019
- Outcome
- Application for condonation and rescission granted. The order of 22 August 2019 is rescinded. Costs awarded against the first respondent.
- Judges
- Mahomed AJ
- Legal Topics
- Rescission of Judgment, Rule 42 Application, Letters of Authority, Deceased Estate Procedure, Condonation, Exception Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
JA Khunou (Known as Mofedi, Maki)
Applicant
PK Sebesho
Respondent
Master of the High Court (Johannesburg)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Judgment Granted on 22 August 2019
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the order granted on 22 August 2019 was erroneously sought and granted in the absence of the applicant.
- 2 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for condonation of the late filing of the rescission application.
- 3 Whether the applicant has a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in launching the rescission application and demonstrated a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter, namely her home, which she claims as sole heir. The exception to the second motion was properly filed and opposed, indicating that the matter was not unopposed. The court held that the order was erroneously sought and granted in the absence of the applicant, as the exception was still to be argued and the applicant was denied an opportunity to be heard. The applicant was entitled to condonation for the late filing, and the rescission of the order was warranted to allow the matter to be properly...
Court Disposition
Application for condonation and rescission granted. The order of 22 August 2019 is rescinded. Costs awarded against the first respondent.
Orders
- The late filing of this application is condoned.
- The order granted on 22 August 2019 is rescinded.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment