Nesane and Another v Pollock N.O and Others (Leave to Appeal) (56445/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 144 (13 February 2025)

Nesane and Another v Pollock N.O and Others (Leave to Appeal) (56445/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 144 (13 February 2025)

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the stringent requirements for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. There were no reasonable prospects of success, no conflicting judgments, and no compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard. The grounds advanced by the applicants did not justify the granting of leave. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 144
Parties
Applicant: Tshianne Onica Nesane; Applicant: Azimbo Lodge Close Corporation; Respondent: Richard Keay Pollock N.O; Respondent: Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O; Respondent: Oscar Jabulani Sithole N.O; Respondent: Ignatius Clement Mikateko Shirilele N.O; Respondent: Michelle Schutte N.O; Respondent: Vele Investments (Pty) Limited (In Liquidation)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 February 2025
Case Number
56445/2020
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 04 November 2024.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
John Richard Meaden
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Costs Order, Superior Courts Act, Conflicting Judgments
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Costs Order Superior Courts Act Conflicting Judgments

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

Tshianne Onica Nesane

Applicant

Azimbo Lodge Close Corporation

Applicant

Richard Keay Pollock N.O

Respondent

Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O

Respondent

Oscar Jabulani Sithole N.O

Respondent

Ignatius Clement Mikateko Shirilele N.O

Respondent

Michelle Schutte N.O

Respondent

Vele Investments (Pty) Limited (In Liquidation)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 04 November 2024.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have met the threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons or conflicting judgments justifying leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the applicants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the stringent requirements for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. There were no reasonable prospects of success, no conflicting judgments, and no compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard. The grounds advanced by the applicants did not justify the granting of leave. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal the order and judgment dated 04 November 2024 is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the respondents’ costs of the application on a party and party scale, and at scale B for legal counsel.