Mogodiri and Another v Exclusive Log Cabins CC and Another [2023] ZAGPPHC 318; 49281/2019 (22 May 2023)

Mogodiri and Another v Exclusive Log Cabins CC and Another [2023] ZAGPPHC 318; 49281/2019 (22 May 2023)

The court found, after careful and dispassionate consideration of the grounds for leave to appeal and the submissions of both parties, that the threshold set by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act had been met. The applicant raised triable issues regarding the interpretation of the rules governing rescission applications, the evaluation of the factual matrix, and the application of relevant statutory provisions. The court was persuaded that there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion and that leave to appeal should therefore be granted.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 318
Parties
Applicant: Sello Elly Mogodiri and Another; Respondent: Exclusive Log Cabins CC and Another
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 May 2023
Case Number
49281/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Bench
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the full bench of the division is granted; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Judges
NQUMSE
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Rescission Application, Superior Courts Act, Housing Protection Measures Act, National Home Builders Registration Council
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Rescission Application Superior Courts Act Housing Protection Measures Act National Home Builders Registration Council

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sello Elly Mogodiri and Another

Applicant

Exclusive Log Cabins CC and Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Full Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act has been met.
  2. 2 Whether the court erred in its interpretation of the rules governing rescission applications.
  3. 3 Whether the factual matrix was properly evaluated by the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, after careful and dispassionate consideration of the grounds for leave to appeal and the submissions of both parties, that the threshold set by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act had been met. The applicant raised triable issues regarding the interpretation of the rules governing rescission applications, the evaluation of the factual matrix, and the application of relevant statutory provisions. The court was persuaded that there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion and that leave to appeal should therefore be granted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the full bench of the division is granted; costs to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this division is granted.
  • Costs to be costs in the appeal.