Matlanato v Moshidi and Others (7595/2017) [2025] ZALMPPHC 73 (3 April 2025)
- Citation
- [2025] ZALMPPHC 73
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
- Panel
- S Du Plessis
- Case number
- 7595/2017
More details
- Court
- Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
- Panel
- S Du Plessis
- Case number
- 7595/2017
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the circumstances justified a postponement of the matter. The 1st and 2nd defendants were held responsible for the wasted costs occasioned by the postponement, including the costs of the plaintiff's expert witness, on a party and party scale, as their conduct necessitated the postponement.
Court disposition
The matter is postponed sine die. The 1st and 2nd defendants are ordered to pay the wasted costs for the day, including the costs of the plaintiff's expert witness, on a party and party scale.
Orders
- The matter is postponed sine die.
- The 1st and 2nd defendants are to pay the wasted costs for the day occasioned by the postponement, including the cost of the plaintiff’s expert witness, on a party and party scale.
02
Material facts
Parties
Matlanato Lhlogonolo Hustings
PlaintiffMoshidi Matsela Patricia
DefendantMatlanato Patrick Lesiba
DefendantMinister of Home Affairs
DefendantMEC: Limpopo Department of Transport
DefendantGovernment Employee Pension Fund (GEPF)
DefendantSouth African Social Security Agency (SASSA)
Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Procedure / Postponement
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the matter should be postponed.
- 02
Who should bear the costs occasioned by the postponement.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The plaintiff sought a postponement of the matter and requested that the costs occasioned by the postponement, including the costs of the expert witness, be borne by the 1st and 2nd defendants.
- Respondent
- The 1st and 2nd defendants opposed the costs order but did not oppose the postponement itself.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Uniform Rules of Court, Rule 41
A court may order a postponement and determine liability for wasted costs occasioned thereby, including costs of expert witnesses, on a party and party scale.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the circumstances justified a postponement of the matter. The 1st and 2nd defendants were held responsible for the wasted costs occasioned by the postponement, including the costs of the plaintiff's expert witness, on a party and party scale, as their conduct necessitated the postponement.
Court disposition
The matter is postponed sine die. The 1st and 2nd defendants are ordered to pay the wasted costs for the day, including the costs of the plaintiff's expert witness, on a party and party scale.
- The matter is postponed sine die.
- The 1st and 2nd defendants are to pay the wasted costs for the day occasioned by the postponement, including the cost of the plaintiff’s expert witness, on a party and party scale.
Source and reliance status
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Judgment
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
LIMPOPO DIVISION, POLOKWANE
CASE NO: 7595/2017
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO THE JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED.
DATE: 03 April 2025
SIGNATURE:
In the matter between:
MATLANATO
LHLOGONOLO HUSTINGS
PLAINTIFF
And
MOSHIDI
MATSELA PATRICIA
1ST DEFENDANT
MATLANATO
PATRICK LESIBA
2ND DEFENDANT
MINISTER
OF HOME AFFAIRS
3RD DEFENDANT
MEC:
LIMPOPO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT 4TH DEFENDANT
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE PENSION FUND (GEPF) 5TH DEFENDANT
SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL SECURITY AGENCY (SASSA) 6TH DEFENDANT
JUDGMENT
DU PLESSIS AJ:
After having read the papers and having heard Counsel, the following order is made:
[1] The matter is postponed sine die;
[2] The 1st and 2nd Defendants are to pay the wasted costs for the day occasioned by the postponement, including the cost of the Plaintiff’s expert witness, on a party and party scale B.
S
DU PLESSIS
ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT,
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.