Lebelo v First National Bank (Ex Tempore- Leave to Appeal) (143809/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 729 (21 July 2025)

Lebelo v First National Bank (Ex Tempore- Leave to Appeal) (143809/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 729 (21 July 2025)

The court held that the order removing the application from the urgent roll does not constitute an appealable decision, as it does not finally dispose of the applicant's rights and does not cause irreparable harm. The applicant is not precluded from approaching the urgent court again with properly stated grounds for urgency. The application for leave to appeal is therefore dismissed, and each party is ordered to pay their own costs.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 729
Parties
Applicant: Lenah Motlahabo Lebelo; Respondent: First National Bank
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 July 2025
Case Number
143809/2024
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Removal From Urgent Roll
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Wilson
Legal Topics
Appealability of Interlocutory Orders, Urgent Application Procedure
Civil Procedure Appealability of Interlocutory Orders Urgent Application Procedure

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lenah Motlahabo Lebelo

Applicant

First National Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Removal From Urgent Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order removing a matter from the urgent roll is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established irreparable harm justifying leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the order removing the application from the urgent roll does not constitute an appealable decision, as it does not finally dispose of the applicant's rights and does not cause irreparable harm. The applicant is not precluded from approaching the urgent court again with properly stated grounds for urgency. The application for leave to appeal is therefore dismissed, and each party is ordered to pay their own costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • Each party will pay their own costs.