Mokhatla and Others v Ntsuseng and Others (2022/554) [2024] ZAGPJHC 498 (21 May 2024)

Mokhatla and Others v Ntsuseng and Others (2022/554) [2024] ZAGPJHC 498 (21 May 2024)

The application is fatally defective due to multiple procedural irregularities, including failure to properly identify and join parties, lack of proper service, disorganised and incomplete papers, and non-compliance with practice directives. The applicants failed to establish urgency in accordance with the rules and directives, and the application cannot be regularised. The conduct of the applicants' legal representatives warrants punitive costs and an order that they not be paid any fees arising from the prosecution of the application. The costs of the City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality are reserved for later determination. The Registrar is directed to furnish a copy of the...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 498
Parties
Applicant: Mokhatla, Rosah; Applicant: Mokhatla, Moses; Applicant: Mamadumo, Monareng Agnecious; Applicant: Mathobela, Lucky; Applicant: Sehurutsi, Mabe Jacob; Applicant: Moabelo, Choene; Respondent: Ntsuseng, Solly; Respondent: Mahlangu, Pinky; Respondent: Mashamaite, Lawrence; Respondent: Sheriff of Tembisa; Respondent: City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 May 2024
Case Number
2022/554
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment on Urgent Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with punitive costs and fee forfeiture orders against applicants' legal representatives.
Judges
Moorcroft
Legal Topics
Urgent Motion Practice, Spoliation, Punitive Costs, Joinder and Intervention, Practice Directives Noncompliance
Civil Procedure Urgent Motion Practice Spoliation Punitive Costs Joinder and Intervention Practice Directives Noncompliance

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mokhatla, Rosah

Applicant

Mokhatla, Moses

Applicant

Mamadumo, Monareng Agnecious

Applicant

Mathobela, Lucky

Applicant

Sehurutsi, Mabe Jacob

Applicant

Moabelo, Choene

Applicant

Ntsuseng, Solly

Respondent

Mahlangu, Pinky

Respondent

Mashamaite, Lawrence

Respondent

Sheriff of Tembisa

Respondent

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment on Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the urgent application complies with the procedural requirements for urgent motion court.
  2. 2 Whether the parties to the application are properly identified and joined.
  3. 3 Whether the application is capable of regularisation given its procedural defects.

Ratio Decidendi

The application is fatally defective due to multiple procedural irregularities, including failure to properly identify and join parties, lack of proper service, disorganised and incomplete papers, and non-compliance with practice directives. The applicants failed to establish urgency in accordance with the rules and directives, and the application cannot be regularised. The conduct of the applicants' legal representatives warrants punitive costs and an order that they not be paid any fees arising from the prosecution of the application. The costs of the City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality are reserved for later determination. The Registrar is directed to furnish a copy of the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with punitive costs and fee forfeiture orders against applicants' legal representatives.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the respondents’ costs on the scale as between attorney and client, not lower than scale C.