Land Agruiculture Development Bank of SA t/a Landbank vs Twee Jonge Gezellen (Pty) Ltd and Others (19694/2008) [2010] ZAWCHC 374 (25 March 2010)

Land Agruiculture Development Bank of SA t/a Landbank vs Twee Jonge Gezellen (Pty) Ltd and Others (19694/2008) [2010] ZAWCHC 374 (25 March 2010)

The court found that the respondents had abandoned most of their initial defences, including the constitutional challenge to the provisional sentence procedure. The only remaining grounds for appeal were those set out in the final paragraph of the respondents' application. Upon consideration, the court concluded...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] ZAWCHC 374
Parties
Applicant: Land Agricultural Development Bank of SA t/a Landbank; Respondent: Twee Jonge Gezellen (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Nicolas Charles Krone; Respondent: Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
19694/2008
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Desai
Legal Topics
Provisional Sentence, Constitutionality of Provisional Sentence, Leave to Appeal
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Provisional Sentence Constitutionality of Provisional Sentence Leave to Appeal

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Land Agricultural Development Bank of SA t/a Landbank

Applicant

Twee Jonge Gezellen (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Nicolas Charles Krone

Respondent

Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the grant of provisional sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the constitutionality of the provisional sentence procedure warrants leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents had abandoned most of their initial defences, including the constitutional challenge to the provisional sentence procedure. The only remaining grounds for appeal were those set out in the final paragraph of the respondents' application. Upon consideration, the court concluded that there were no reasonable prospects of another court coming to a different conclusion, even on the limited basis advanced by the respondents' counsel. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is awarded costs.