National Soccer League and Another v South African Football Association and Others (90375/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 170 (17 May 2019)

National Soccer League and Another v South African Football Association and Others (90375/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 170 (17 May 2019)

The court found that the Rule 7 application challenging the authority of the deponent was without merit and dismissed it, ordering costs against the first respondent on an attorney and client scale. Regarding the Rule 30A application to compel the furnishing of documents under Rules 35(12) and 35(14), the court held that the applicants were not obliged to furnish the documents sought, as they were either not referred to in the founding affidavit or not relevant to the interlocutory proceedings. The application to compel was dismissed, with costs awarded on a punitive scale, including the costs of three counsel.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 170
Parties
Applicant: National Soccer League; Applicant: ABSA Bank Limited; Respondent: South African Football Association; Respondent: Outsurance Insurance Company Limited; Respondent: Outsurance Life Insurance Company Limited; Respondent: Outvest Property Limited; Respondent: Outsurance Holdings Limited
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 May 2019
Case Number
90375/2018
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interlocutory Applications Preceding Main Hearing; Orders Granted With Reasons to Follow.
Outcome
Both interlocutory applications dismissed; costs awarded against the first respondent on punitive scales.
Judges
Collis
Legal Topics
Rule 7 Authority Challenge, Rule 30a Application to Compel, Rule 35 Document Disclosure, Costs Punitive Scale
Civil Procedure Rule 7 Authority Challenge Rule 30a Application to Compel Rule 35 Document Disclosure Costs Punitive Scale

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Soccer League

Applicant

ABSA Bank Limited

Applicant

South African Football Association

Respondent

Outsurance Insurance Company Limited

Respondent

Outsurance Life Insurance Company Limited

Respondent

Outvest Property Limited

Respondent

Outsurance Holdings Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interlocutory Applications Preceding Main Hearing; Orders Granted With Reasons to Follow.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the authority of the deponent to the founding affidavit was validly challenged under Rule 7.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were obliged to furnish documents sought under Rules 35(12) and 35(14).
  3. 3 Whether the interlocutory applications to compel compliance should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Rule 7 application challenging the authority of the deponent was without merit and dismissed it, ordering costs against the first respondent on an attorney and client scale. Regarding the Rule 30A application to compel the furnishing of documents under Rules 35(12) and 35(14), the court held that the applicants were not obliged to furnish the documents sought, as they were either not referred to in the founding affidavit or not relevant to the interlocutory proceedings. The application to compel was dismissed, with costs awarded on a punitive scale, including the costs of three counsel.

Court Disposition

Both interlocutory applications dismissed; costs awarded against the first respondent on punitive scales.

Orders

  • The Rule 7 application is dismissed with the first respondent ordered to pay the costs of the second applicant on an attorney and client scale from 1 May 2019.
  • The Rule 30A application to compel the furnishing of documents sought in terms of Rule 35(12) and 35(14) is dismissed with the first respondent ordered to pay the costs of the first applicant on a punitive scale, such costs to include the costs of three counsel.