Modise and Others v Tafu and Others (11935/2016 ; 14038/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2069 (22 March 2023)

Modise and Others v Tafu and Others (11935/2016 ; 14038/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2069 (22 March 2023)

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias. The allegations of corruption were based on hearsay and double hearsay, unsupported by confirmatory affidavits, and contradicted by the timeline of judicial allocation. The applicant's own counsel conceded chronological discrepancies and the unreliability of the source. The court emphasized that the test for recusal requires objective facts, not speculation or media reports. The application was deemed vexatious and an abuse of process, brought as a tactical adjunct to failed attempts to postpone the trial. The judge held that there was no merit to the claim of bias and dismissed the application with...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 2069
Parties
Applicant: Fredrick Leonard Goitsemang Modise; Applicant: Tshepiso Modise; Respondent: Reverend Tafu; Defendant: Michael Sandlana; Applicant: 2 Others; Respondent: 34 Others
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 March 2023
Case Number
11935/2016 ; 14038/2019
Procedural Posture
Recusal Application / Application for Recusal Following Dismissal of Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for recusal dismissed with costs on attorney and client scale, including costs of three counsels.
Judges
PD. Phahlane
Legal Topics
Recusal of Judge, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Hearsay Evidence, Costs Order, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Recusal of Judge Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Hearsay Evidence Costs Order Abuse of Process

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fredrick Leonard Goitsemang Modise

Applicant

Tshepiso Modise

Applicant

Reverend Tafu

Respondent

Michael Sandlana

Defendant

2 Others

Applicant

34 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Recusal Application / Application for Recusal Following Dismissal of Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant established a reasonable apprehension of bias warranting the judge's recusal.
  2. 2 Whether hearsay allegations of corruption, unsupported by confirmatory affidavits, can justify recusal.
  3. 3 Whether the recusal application was bona fide or constituted an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a reasonable apprehension of bias. The allegations of corruption were based on hearsay and double hearsay, unsupported by confirmatory affidavits, and contradicted by the timeline of judicial allocation. The applicant's own counsel conceded chronological discrepancies and the unreliability of the source. The court emphasized that the test for recusal requires objective facts, not speculation or media reports. The application was deemed vexatious and an abuse of process, brought as a tactical adjunct to failed attempts to postpone the trial. The judge held that there was no merit to the claim of bias and dismissed the application with...

Court Disposition

Application for recusal dismissed with costs on attorney and client scale, including costs of three counsels.

Orders

  • The application for recusal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of three counsels.