Nedbank Limited and Another v Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd and Another In re: Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd and Another v Waterkloofs Pruitprojects (Pty) Ltd and Others (4741/2006) [2008] ZAGPHC 239 (6 June 2008)

Nedbank Limited and Another v Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd and Another In re: Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd and Another v Waterkloofs Pruitprojects (Pty) Ltd and Others (4741/2006) [2008] ZAGPHC 239 (6 June 2008)

The applications for leave to appeal by the fifth and sixth respondents were filed out of time and no condonation was sought or explanation provided for the delay. The rules regarding time limits for leave to appeal are peremptory and unexplained non-compliance is fatal. The court cannot exercise its discretion in the absence of facts justifying condonation. Accordingly, the applications for leave to appeal by the fifth and sixth respondents are dismissed with costs. The application for leave to appeal by the seventh respondent, Nedbank Limited, was filed within the prescribed period and raises substantial points of law and principle, including the test applied in opposed motions, locus...

Citation
[2008] ZAGPHC 239
Parties
Applicant: Nedbank Limited; Applicant: Pieter Arnoldus Cronje N.O.; Applicant: Enver Mohamed Motala N.O.; Respondent: Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Crysal Cooper de la Pierre N.O.; Respondent: Waterkloofs Pruitprojects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Registrar of Companies & Close Corporation; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds; Respondent: Master of the High Court; Respondent: Government of the Republic of South Africa
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2008
Case Number
4741/2006
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 29 April 2008.
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted to Nedbank Limited (seventh respondent in the main application). Applications for leave to appeal by Pieter Arnoldus Cronje N.O. and Enver Mohamed Motala N.O. (fifth and sixth respondents) are dismissed with costs.
Judges
N M Mavundla
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Compliance With Rules, Costs Award, Locus Standi
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Condonation Compliance With Rules Costs Award Locus Standi

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nedbank Limited

Applicant

Pieter Arnoldus Cronje N.O.

Applicant

Enver Mohamed Motala N.O.

Applicant

Hillcrest Village (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Crysal Cooper de la Pierre N.O.

Respondent

Waterkloofs Pruitprojects (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Registrar of Companies & Close Corporation

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Master of the High Court

Respondent

Government of the Republic of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 29 April 2008.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications for leave to appeal by the fifth and sixth respondents were filed within the prescribed time limits.
  2. 2 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the applications for leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the seventh respondent's application for leave to appeal complies with the rules and merits consideration.

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for leave to appeal by the fifth and sixth respondents were filed out of time and no condonation was sought or explanation provided for the delay. The rules regarding time limits for leave to appeal are peremptory and unexplained non-compliance is fatal. The court cannot exercise its discretion in the absence of facts justifying condonation. Accordingly, the applications for leave to appeal by the fifth and sixth respondents are dismissed with costs. The application for leave to appeal by the seventh respondent, Nedbank Limited, was filed within the prescribed period and raises substantial points of law and principle, including the test applied in opposed motions, locus...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted to Nedbank Limited (seventh respondent in the main application). Applications for leave to appeal by Pieter Arnoldus Cronje N.O. and Enver Mohamed Motala N.O. (fifth and sixth respondents) are dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole of the judgment handed down on 29 April 2008 is granted to Nedbank Limited (seventh respondent in the main application).
  • Applications for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal by Pieter Arnoldus Cronje N.O. and Enver Mohamed Motala N.O. (fifth and sixth respondents) are dismissed.