Newby and Another v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (16/08014) [2024] ZAGPJHC 307 (25 March 2024)

Newby and Another v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (16/08014) [2024] ZAGPJHC 307 (25 March 2024)

The application for leave to appeal was filed almost five months after the order, in clear non-compliance with rule 49(1)(b). No condonation application was brought, and the applicants had ample opportunity to do so prior to the hearing. The request to bring condonation after the hearing was denied as unfair and contrary to the interests of justice. Even if condonation were considered, the applicants failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, and their prospects of success on appeal were weak. The main application was dismissed due to the failure to join the seller, who had a direct and material interest in the matter. The applicants proceeded with the sale and accepted...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 307
Parties
Applicant: Lionel Newby; Applicant: Newby Designer Homes CC; Respondent: The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2024
Case Number
16/08014
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application and Grant of Counterapplication
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Y Carrim
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Non Joinder, Loan Agreement, Unlawful Transfer
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Leave to Appeal Condonation Non Joinder Loan Agreement Unlawful Transfer

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lionel Newby

Applicant

Newby Designer Homes CC

Applicant

The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application and Grant of Counterapplication

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal should be dismissed for non-compliance with rule 49(1)(b).
  2. 2 Whether condonation for late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success on appeal justify granting leave.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was filed almost five months after the order, in clear non-compliance with rule 49(1)(b). No condonation application was brought, and the applicants had ample opportunity to do so prior to the hearing. The request to bring condonation after the hearing was denied as unfair and contrary to the interests of justice. Even if condonation were considered, the applicants failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, and their prospects of success on appeal were weak. The main application was dismissed due to the failure to join the seller, who had a direct and material interest in the matter. The applicants proceeded with the sale and accepted...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • Applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application.