Majola v Nitro Securitisation 1 (Pty) Ltd (567/10) [2011] ZASCA 180; 2012 (1) SA 226 (SCA); [2012] 1 All SA 628 (SCA) (30 September 2011)

Majola v Nitro Securitisation 1 (Pty) Ltd (567/10) [2011] ZASCA 180; 2012 (1) SA 226 (SCA); [2012] 1 All SA 628 (SCA) (30 September 2011)

The appeal was dismissed for non-appearance in terms of rule 13(3) of the Supreme Court of Appeal Rules. The appellant failed to appear on two occasions, provided no explanation, and displayed a lack of professionalism expected of an attorney. The respondent suffered ongoing prejudice due to the delay in enforcement of its rights. The appellant raised no substantive defence to the summary judgment and his technical objections were found to be without merit. The court found no grounds to exercise its discretion in favour of the appellant by striking the matter from the roll or postponing it. The appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and finality was required. Costs on an attorney...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 180
Parties
Appellant: Votani Majola; Respondent: Nitro Securitisation 1 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 2011
Case Number
567/10
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment; Hearing in Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for non-appearance; costs awarded on attorney and client scale.
Judges
Brand, Ponnan, Bosielo, Petse, Plasket
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Non Appearance, Contract Breach, Cession of Rights, Attorney and Client Costs
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Summary Judgment Non Appearance Contract Breach Cession of Rights Attorney and Client Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Votani Majola

Appellant

Nitro Securitisation 1 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment; Hearing in Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-appearance under rule 13(3) of the Supreme Court of Appeal rules.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had any bona fide defence to the summary judgment granted by the court below.
  3. 3 Whether the procedural and substantive objections raised by the appellant to the summary judgment were valid.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed for non-appearance in terms of rule 13(3) of the Supreme Court of Appeal Rules. The appellant failed to appear on two occasions, provided no explanation, and displayed a lack of professionalism expected of an attorney. The respondent suffered ongoing prejudice due to the delay in enforcement of its rights. The appellant raised no substantive defence to the summary judgment and his technical objections were found to be without merit. The court found no grounds to exercise its discretion in favour of the appellant by striking the matter from the roll or postponing it. The appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and finality was required. Costs on an attorney...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for non-appearance; costs awarded on attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.