Ntlemeza v Helen Suzman Foundation and Another (402/2017) [2017] ZASCA 93; [2017] 3 All SA 589 (SCA); 2017 (5) SA 402 (SCA) (9 June 2017)

Ntlemeza v Helen Suzman Foundation and Another (402/2017) [2017] ZASCA 93; [2017] 3 All SA 589 (SCA); 2017 (5) SA 402 (SCA) (9 June 2017)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the refusal of an application for leave to appeal does not preclude the granting of an execution order under s 18 of the Superior Courts Act, especially where further appeal processes are anticipated. The court found that the high court correctly anticipated further appeals and issued an order that would remain effective pending all present and future appeals. Exceptional circumstances were established by the adverse judicial findings against the appellant's integrity and the public interest in the proper functioning of the DPCI. The respondents proved on a balance of probabilities that the public would suffer irreparable harm if the appellant...

Citation
[2017] ZASCA 93
Parties
Appellant: Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza; Respondent: Helen Suzman Foundation; Respondent: Freedom Under Law
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2017
Case Number
402/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Execution Order Under S 18 of the Superior Courts Act
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel, to be paid personally by the appellant.
Judges
Navsa, Ponnan, Majiedt, Dambuza, Mathopo
Legal Topics
Fit and Proper Person, Exceptional Circumstances, Irreparable Harm, Execution Pending Appeal, Judicial Review of Appointment
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Fit and Proper Person Exceptional Circumstances Irreparable Harm Execution Pending Appeal Judicial Review of Appointment

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza

Appellant

Helen Suzman Foundation

Respondent

Freedom Under Law

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Execution Order Under S 18 of the Superior Courts Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of an application for leave to appeal precludes a subsequent application for leave to execute under s 18 of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant for the execution order proved the existence of exceptional circumstances as required by s 18(1).
  3. 3 Whether the respondents proved on a balance of probabilities that they would suffer irreparable harm if the execution order was not granted and that the appellant would not.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the refusal of an application for leave to appeal does not preclude the granting of an execution order under s 18 of the Superior Courts Act, especially where further appeal processes are anticipated. The court found that the high court correctly anticipated further appeals and issued an order that would remain effective pending all present and future appeals. Exceptional circumstances were established by the adverse judicial findings against the appellant's integrity and the public interest in the proper functioning of the DPCI. The respondents proved on a balance of probabilities that the public would suffer irreparable harm if the appellant...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel, to be paid personally by the appellant.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs including the costs of two counsel.
  • The appellant is ordered to pay the costs personally.