Mostert and Other v Nash and Others (56338/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 401 (11 June 2021)

Mostert and Other v Nash and Others (56338/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 401 (11 June 2021)

The court held that, although the cost order by Tuchten J was not explicit, it should be interpreted in accordance with established practice as imposing joint and several liability on the parties. The abandonment of the cost order against three parties does not absolve the applicants from their own liability; rather, it reduces their liability to their respective pro-rata share. The applicants remain jointly and severally liable for their share, and the abandonment does not prejudice them or require them to pay more than they would have otherwise. The application for declaratory relief was dismissed as it did not amount to a variation of the original order, and the applicants failed to...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 401
Parties
Applicant: Antony Louis Mostert; Applicant: Antony Louis Mostert N.O.; Applicant: A L Mostert & Co. Incorporated; Respondent: Simon John Nash; Respondent: Midmacor Industries Limited; Respondent: Financial Sector Conduct Authority
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2021
Case Number
56338/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed. Applicants remain jointly and severally liable for costs.
Judges
NE NKOSI
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Joint and Several Liability, Variation of Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Orders Joint and Several Liability Variation of Orders

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

Antony Louis Mostert

Applicant

Antony Louis Mostert N.O.

Applicant

A L Mostert & Co. Incorporated

Applicant

Simon John Nash

Respondent

Midmacor Industries Limited

Respondent

Financial Sector Conduct Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cost order granted by Tuchten J was made jointly and severally against the applicants and other parties.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are absolved from liability for costs due to the respondents abandoning the cost order against three other parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although the cost order by Tuchten J was not explicit, it should be interpreted in accordance with established practice as imposing joint and several liability on the parties. The abandonment of the cost order against three parties does not absolve the applicants from their own liability; rather, it reduces their liability to their respective pro-rata share. The applicants remain jointly and severally liable for their share, and the abandonment does not prejudice them or require them to pay more than they would have otherwise. The application for declaratory relief was dismissed as it did not amount to a variation of the original order, and the applicants failed to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. Applicants remain jointly and severally liable for costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicants, jointly and severally, are to pay the first and second respondents' costs inclusive of costs of two Counsel if so employed.