Mokoena v Dinkebogile Transport Services (Reasons) (CIV APP RC 09/2020) [2025] ZANWHC 88 (27 May 2025)

Mokoena v Dinkebogile Transport Services (Reasons) (CIV APP RC 09/2020) [2025] ZANWHC 88 (27 May 2025)

The respondent failed to comply with multiple procedural requirements, including late filing of the notice of appeal, failure to provide security for costs, and submission of an incomplete record. No application for condonation was made for the incomplete record, nor was there any application to dispense with security for costs. The respondent did not take proper procedural steps to challenge the alleged irregularity of the application to strike, such as filing a notice under rule 30. The cumulative effect of these failures constituted a flagrant disregard for the rules of court. The appeal was therefore properly struck from the roll, and the respondent was ordered to pay costs on a party...

Citation
[2025] ZANWHC 88
Parties
Applicant: Mantoki Emmah Mokoena; Respondent: Dinkebogile Transport Services
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 May 2025
Case Number
CIV APP RC 09/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Reasons for Order Following Striking of Appeal From the Roll
Outcome
Appeal struck from the roll; respondent ordered to pay costs.
Judges
Hendricks, Masike
Legal Topics
Striking From Roll, Security for Costs, Condonation, Appeal Record Completeness
Civil Procedure Striking From Roll Security for Costs Condonation Appeal Record Completeness

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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mantoki Emmah Mokoena

Applicant

Dinkebogile Transport Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Reasons for Order Following Striking of Appeal From the Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent complied with the rules regarding prosecution of appeals, including time limits and provision of security for costs.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent filed a complete record as required by the rules.
  3. 3 Whether the application to strike the appeal from the roll was irregular or justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to comply with multiple procedural requirements, including late filing of the notice of appeal, failure to provide security for costs, and submission of an incomplete record. No application for condonation was made for the incomplete record, nor was there any application to dispense with security for costs. The respondent did not take proper procedural steps to challenge the alleged irregularity of the application to strike, such as filing a notice under rule 30. The cumulative effect of these failures constituted a flagrant disregard for the rules of court. The appeal was therefore properly struck from the roll, and the respondent was ordered to pay costs on a party...

Court Disposition

Appeal struck from the roll; respondent ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • The matter is struck from the roll.
  • The respondent in the application to strike (Dinkebogile Transport Services) is ordered to pay the costs occasioned by the striking of the matter from the roll on a party and party basis on Scale B.