Manamela v Maite (Leave to Appeal) (2023/055949) [2025] ZAGPJHC 104 (31 January 2025)

Manamela v Maite (Leave to Appeal) (2023/055949) [2025] ZAGPJHC 104 (31 January 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the punitive costs orders. The conduct of the applicant’s attorney was egregious and deviated substantially from the standard expected of legal practitioners, justifying the original costs orders. The findings challenged by the applicant primarily related to the dismissal of the contempt application, which was not the subject of the appeal. The principles governing leave to appeal and costs orders were correctly applied, and there was no compelling reason to grant leave. The respondent’s request for a further de bonis propriis costs order was refused, as the application was launched...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 104
Parties
Applicant: Merriam Makwena Manamela; Respondent: Grace Maite
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 January 2025
Case Number
2023/055949
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Orders Following Dismissal of Contempt Application.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
E F Dippenaar
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Costs Orders, De Bonis Propriis, Punitive Costs, Discretion of Court
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs Orders De Bonis Propriis Punitive Costs Discretion of Court

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Merriam Makwena Manamela

Applicant

Grace Maite

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Costs Orders Following Dismissal of Contempt Application.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success in appealing the punitive de bonis propriis costs orders against her attorney.
  2. 2 Whether the costs orders were justified in light of the conduct of the applicant's attorney.
  3. 3 Whether the court exercised its discretion correctly in awarding costs against the attorney.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the punitive costs orders. The conduct of the applicant’s attorney was egregious and deviated substantially from the standard expected of legal practitioners, justifying the original costs orders. The findings challenged by the applicant primarily related to the dismissal of the contempt application, which was not the subject of the appeal. The principles governing leave to appeal and costs orders were correctly applied, and there was no compelling reason to grant leave. The respondent’s request for a further de bonis propriis costs order was refused, as the application was launched...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

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