Olivier v Mbanga NO and Others (031295/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 323 (26 January 2023)

Olivier v Mbanga NO and Others (031295/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 323 (26 January 2023)

The court found that, having considered the grounds of appeal and submissions from counsel, there is a reasonable prospect that another court could reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of the application for leave to intervene. The judge acknowledged the applicant's arguments concerning the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 323
Parties
Applicant: Johny Jacques Olivier; Respondent: Xolani Mbanga N.O.; Respondent: Suzette Bosman N.O.; Respondent: Lisa Anne Kropman Cohen N.O.; Respondent: Palesa Kadi N.O.; Respondent: Ursiclox (RF) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Phatisani Ndebele; Respondent: Suzette Soetwater; Respondent: Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 January 2023
Case Number
031295/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Application for Leave to Intervene.
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Johannesburg. Costs will be costs in the appeal.
Judges
Strijdom
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Intervention Application, Urgent Application, Costs in Appeal
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Intervention Application Urgent Application Costs in Appeal

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johny Jacques Olivier

Applicant

Xolani Mbanga N.O.

Respondent

Suzette Bosman N.O.

Respondent

Lisa Anne Kropman Cohen N.O.

Respondent

Palesa Kadi N.O.

Respondent

Ursiclox (RF) (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Phatisani Ndebele

Respondent

Suzette Soetwater

Respondent

Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Application for Leave to Intervene.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the dismissal of the application for leave to intervene.
  2. 2 Whether the application for leave to intervene was properly before the court.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a resolution authorising the applicant to proceed was fatal to the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, having considered the grounds of appeal and submissions from counsel, there is a reasonable prospect that another court could reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of the application for leave to intervene. The judge acknowledged the applicant's arguments concerning the procedural handling of the intervention application, the absence of a resolution, and the applicant's capacity to act. Applying the raised threshold for leave to appeal under the Superior Courts Act and relevant case law, the court determined that the requirements for granting leave to appeal were met.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Johannesburg. Costs will be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted to the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Johannesburg.
  • Costs will be costs in the appeal.