L.L v M.C.L (038505/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1090 (28 September 2023)

L.L v M.C.L (038505/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1090 (28 September 2023)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence that the respondent's litigation was without merit or instituted solely to harass. While some applications and complaints may have been unsuccessful, the applicant did not demonstrate that all proceedings lacked merit, particularly those relating to the close corporation, which remain pending. The court emphasized that it cannot make a case for the applicant or advise on alternative relief. Accordingly, the application to declare the respondent a vexatious litigant was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1090
Parties
Applicant: L.L; Respondent: M.C.L
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 September 2023
Case Number
038505/2023
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Declaration of Vexatious Litigant
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
Yacoob
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigation, Divorce Proceedings, Maintenance Applications, Protection Orders
Civil Procedure Family and Children Vexatious Litigation Divorce Proceedings Maintenance Applications Protection Orders

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L.L

Applicant

M.C.L

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Declaration of Vexatious Litigant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be declared a vexatious litigant under section 2(1)(b) of the Vexatious Proceedings Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's litigation and complaints against the applicant are without merit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence that the respondent's litigation was without merit or instituted solely to harass. While some applications and complaints may have been unsuccessful, the applicant did not demonstrate that all proceedings lacked merit, particularly those relating to the close corporation, which remain pending. The court emphasized that it cannot make a case for the applicant or advise on alternative relief. Accordingly, the application to declare the respondent a vexatious litigant was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application to declare the respondent a vexatious litigant is dismissed.