Mthombeni v Two Mountains Burial Services (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (3948/2021) [2024] ZALMPPHC 189 (25 November 2024)

Mthombeni v Two Mountains Burial Services (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (3948/2021) [2024] ZALMPPHC 189 (25 November 2024)

The court found that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. Upon consideration of the grounds of appeal and the arguments presented, the court concluded that there is no reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the order upholding the exception and striking out the particulars of claim. The applicant's grounds did not provide a sound or rational basis for success on appeal, and no compelling reasons were demonstrated. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Citation
[2024] ZALMPPHC 189
Parties
Applicant: Gidiza Faris Mthombeni; Respondent: Two Mountains Burial Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 November 2024
Case Number
3948/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Exception Upheld and Particulars of Claim Struck Out
Outcome
Leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
T Deane
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Exception Application, Striking Out of Pleadings, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Exception Application Striking Out of Pleadings Costs Award

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

Gidiza Faris Mthombeni

Applicant

Two Mountains Burial Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Exception Upheld and Particulars of Claim Struck Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the order upholding the exception and striking out the particulars of claim.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons justifying the granting of leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. Upon consideration of the grounds of appeal and the arguments presented, the court concluded that there is no reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the order upholding the exception and striking out the particulars of claim. The applicant's grounds did not provide a sound or rational basis for success on appeal, and no compelling reasons were demonstrated. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.