Mafilika and Others v Elundini Municipality and Another - Application for Leave to Appeal (398/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 6 (23 January 2024)

Mafilika and Others v Elundini Municipality and Another - Application for Leave to Appeal (398/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 6 (23 January 2024)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie right requiring protection, as the disconnection of services was not initiated by the municipality for non-payment but at the instruction of the owner of the premises. The court further held that the application was interlocutory and, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, not appealable. There were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal as envisaged by Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.

Citation
[2024] ZAECMKHC 6
Parties
Applicant: Siphokazi Mafilika & 5 Others; Respondent: Elundini Municipality; Respondent: The Municipal Manager: Elundini Municipality
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Case Number
398/2023
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Urgent Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.
Judges
N G Beshe
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Interlocutory Orders, Urgent Application, Municipal Services, Prima Facie Right
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Orders Urgent Application Municipal Services Prima Facie Right

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siphokazi Mafilika & 5 Others

Applicant

Elundini Municipality

Respondent

The Municipal Manager: Elundini Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the dismissal of the urgent application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants established a prima facie right to the restoration of electricity and water supply.
  3. 3 Whether the interlocutory order is appealable in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie right requiring protection, as the disconnection of services was not initiated by the municipality for non-payment but at the instruction of the owner of the premises. The court further held that the application was interlocutory and, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, not appealable. There were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal as envisaged by Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application, including costs of two counsel where so employed.