Mafungo v Keele (Leave to Appeal) (1930/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 773 (7 August 2024)

Mafungo v Keele (Leave to Appeal) (1930/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 773 (7 August 2024)

The court found that the grounds of appeal advanced by Mr. Mafungo were without merit. The judgment clarified that the filing of an application for leave to appeal does suspend the operation and execution of a final order under section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The court further held that the issue of whether it was irregular to set down a taxation while an application for leave to appeal was pending was immaterial to the outcome. The jurisdictional requirements for leave to appeal were not met, and the application was dismissed.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 773
Parties
Applicant: Kalipa Kagiso Mangaliso Mafungo; Respondent: Dr. Mothobi Godfrey Keele
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 August 2024
Case Number
1930/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Suspension of Order, Taxation of Costs, Superior Courts Act
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Suspension of Order Taxation of Costs Superior Courts Act

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

Kalipa Kagiso Mangaliso Mafungo

Applicant

Dr. Mothobi Godfrey Keele

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the jurisdictional requirements for leave to be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the filing of a notice of appeal suspended the operation and execution of the order handed down by Sardiwalla J.
  3. 3 Whether the taxation of the bill of costs was irregular while an application for leave to appeal was pending.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grounds of appeal advanced by Mr. Mafungo were without merit. The judgment clarified that the filing of an application for leave to appeal does suspend the operation and execution of a final order under section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The court further held that the issue of whether it was irregular to set down a taxation while an application for leave to appeal was pending was immaterial to the outcome. The jurisdictional requirements for leave to appeal were not met, and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.