Marotex (Pty) Ltd (In Business Rescue) and Others v ABSA Bank Limited (Leave to Appeal) (31562/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 362 (10 April 2025)
The court found that, after hearing oral argument, there are no reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different conclusion. The judge was satisfied that the requirements for leave to appeal, as set out in Rule 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, were not met. Accordingly, the application for leave to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] ZAGPPHC 362
- Parties
- Applicant: Marotex (Pty) Ltd (In Business Rescue); Applicant: The Commissioner of the South African Revenue Services; Applicant: Natalie Smit; Applicant: City of Tshwane Local Authority; Applicant: The Body Corporate of Harmony Village; Applicant: Werner Cawood; Applicant: JC Beer; Applicant: R.R. Makiwane; Applicant: MM Ndziba; Applicant: LN Ndziba; Applicant: Jan Jacob van Zyl de Villiers N.O. (previous BRP); Applicant: The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission; Applicant: DL Harding; Respondent: ABSA Bank Limited
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 31562/2018
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- S. Potterill
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Costs Order
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Marotex (Pty) Ltd (In Business Rescue)
Applicant
The Commissioner of the South African Revenue Services
Applicant
Natalie Smit
Applicant
City of Tshwane Local Authority
Applicant
The Body Corporate of Harmony Village
Applicant
Werner Cawood
Applicant
JC Beer
Applicant
R.R. Makiwane
Applicant
MM Ndziba
Applicant
LN Ndziba
Applicant
Jan Jacob van Zyl de Villiers N.O. (previous BRP)
Applicant
The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission
Applicant
DL Harding
Applicant
ABSA Bank Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted under Rule 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
- 2 Whether the appeal has reasonable prospects of success.
- 3 Whether costs should be awarded and on what scale.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, after hearing oral argument, there are no reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different conclusion. The judge was satisfied that the requirements for leave to appeal, as set out in Rule 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, were not met. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed. The court further ordered that costs be awarded against the applicants on scale C, reflecting the lack of merit in the application.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application on scale C.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
55 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
Case Number: 31562/2018
(1) REPORTABLE: NO.
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO.
(3) REVISED.
DATE 2025-04-10
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
MAROTEX (PTY) LTD (IN BUSINESS RESCUE)
First Applicant
THE COMMISSIONER OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN
REVENUE SERVICES
Second Applicant
NATALIE SMIT
Third Applicant
CITY OF TSHWANE LOCAL AUTHORITY
Fourth Applicant
THE BODY CORPORATE OF HARMONY VILLAGE
Fifth Applicant
WERNER CAWOOD
Sixth Applicant
JC BEER
Seventh Applicant
R.R. MAKIWANE
Eighth Applicant
MM NDZIBA
Ninth Applicant
LN NDZIBA
Tenth Applicant
JAN JACOB VAN ZYL DE VILLIERS N.O.
(previous BRP)
Eleventh Applicant
THE COMPANIES AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
COMMISSION
Twelfth Applicant
DL HARDING
Thirteenth Applicant
and
ABSA BANK LIMITED
Respondent
This judgment was prepared and authored by the Judge whose name is reflected and is handed down electronically by circulation to the Parties/their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines. The date for handing down is deemed to be 10 April 2025.
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
POTTERILL J
[1] After hearing oral argument I am satisfied that in terms of Rule 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 leave to appeal is not be given as I am of the opinion that the appeal would have no reasonable prospects of success.
[2] The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on scale C.
S. POTTERILL
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
CASE NO: 31562/2018
HEARD ON: 9 April 2025
FOR THE 8TH- 10TH APPLICANTS: ADV. M. NDZIBA
INSTRUCTED BY: GM Tjiane Attorneys
FOR THE RESPONDENT: ADV. M.P. VAN DER MERWE SC
INSTRUCTED BY: Tim du Toit & Co Inc.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10 April 2025