Mdluli v National Housing Finance Corporation (Application for Leave to Appeal) (J841/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 385 (3 October 2024)

Mdluli v National Housing Finance Corporation (Application for Leave to Appeal) (J841/2024) [2024] ZALCJHB 385 (3 October 2024)

The Court held that the order striking the urgent application off the roll for lack of urgency is not appealable as it is not final, does not dispose of the rights of the parties, and does not resolve a substantial portion of the relief claimed. The applicant retains the right to re-enrol the matter in the ordinary course and to supplement her papers. Accordingly, leave to appeal is dismissed, and no costs order is warranted given the circumstances.

Citation
[2024] ZALCJHB 385
Parties
Applicant: Dimakatso Mdluli; Respondent: National Housing Finance Corporation
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 October 2024
Case Number
J841/2024
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Urgent Application Struck Off Roll
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; applicant may supplement papers; no order as to costs.
Judges
Tlhotlhalemaje
Legal Topics
Appealability of Orders, Urgent Application Struck Off Roll, Leave to Appeal, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Appealability of Orders Urgent Application Struck Off Roll Leave to Appeal Costs Order

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dimakatso Mdluli

Applicant

National Housing Finance Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Urgent Application Struck Off Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order striking the urgent application off the roll for lack of urgency is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted in circumstances where the matter remains pending before the Court.
  3. 3 Whether a costs order is warranted in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the order striking the urgent application off the roll for lack of urgency is not appealable as it is not final, does not dispose of the rights of the parties, and does not resolve a substantial portion of the relief claimed. The applicant retains the right to re-enrol the matter in the ordinary course and to supplement her papers. Accordingly, leave to appeal is dismissed, and no costs order is warranted given the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; applicant may supplement papers; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is granted leave to supplement her papers before the Court if she so desires.