Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd t/a Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd and Another v First Bank t/a Wesbank and Another (49347/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 370 (28 May 2021)
The applicants failed to establish a basis for interim relief as no pending application existed at the time of hearing, rendering the disputes non-existent. The relief sought in prayer 2 is identical to relief previously sought and dismissed, and the applicants did not present new evidence. The court is functus officio and the matter is res judicata. The applicants admitted the breach of the instalment sale agreement, which entitled the first respondent to cancellation and repossession of the motor vehicle. The applicants' financial difficulties are irrelevant to the enforcement of the judgment. The application is unjustified and intended to delay execution.
- Citation
- [2021] ZAGPPHC 370
- Parties
- Applicant: Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd t/a Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Kgasoane, John Karabo; Respondent: First Bank Ltd t/a Wesbank; Respondent: The Deputy Sheriff of the High Court Johannesburg South
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 28 May 2021
- Case Number
- 49347/2018
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict and Stay of Execution
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
- Judges
- E.M Kubushi
- Legal Topics
- Interim Interdict, Stay of Execution, Instalment Sale Agreement, Summary Judgment, Res Judicata, Functus Officio
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd t/a Nalek Security (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Kgasoane, John Karabo
Applicant
First Bank Ltd t/a Wesbank
Respondent
The Deputy Sheriff of the High Court Johannesburg South
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict and Stay of Execution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an interim interdict restraining the first respondent from repossessing the motor vehicle pending another application.
- 2 Whether the execution of the previous court order should be stayed pending settlement of the correct amount due to the first respondent.
- 3 Whether the relief sought is barred by res judicata and functus officio.
Ratio Decidendi
The applicants failed to establish a basis for interim relief as no pending application existed at the time of hearing, rendering the disputes non-existent. The relief sought in prayer 2 is identical to relief previously sought and dismissed, and the applicants did not present new evidence. The court is functus officio and the matter is res judicata. The applicants admitted the breach of the instalment sale agreement, which entitled the first respondent to cancellation and repossession of the motor vehicle. The applicants' financial difficulties are irrelevant to the enforcement of the judgment. The application is unjustified and intended to delay execution.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- The applicants are ordered to pay the first respondent’s costs of the opposed application jointly and severally, on an attorney and client scale.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment