Premier of Gauteng v Khanyi obo K (29703/08) [2011] ZAGPJHC 31 (18 February 2011)

Premier of Gauteng v Khanyi obo K (29703/08) [2011] ZAGPJHC 31 (18 February 2011)

The court found that, although the judgment primarily concerned factual findings, the case involved important policy considerations and emotional consequences that could have influenced the initial decision. Recognizing the significance of the matter to the parties and the potential for error in drawing inferences, the court determined that fairness required another court to review the judgment. Both parties agreed that the Supreme Court of Appeal was the appropriate forum. Despite reservations about burdening the appellate court with factual issues, the court concluded that the appeal should proceed to the Supreme Court of Appeal and granted leave accordingly.

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 31
Parties
Applicant: Premier of Gauteng; Respondent: Khanyi, Thembeni Martha obo K, P S
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Case Number
29703/08
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal directed to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs in the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.
Judges
N.P. Willis
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Factual Inference, Costs on Appeal
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Factual Inference Costs on Appeal

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Premier of Gauteng

Applicant

Khanyi, Thembeni Martha obo K, P S

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment and order delivered on 18 February 2011.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal should be directed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
  3. 3 Whether costs of the application for leave to appeal should be costs in the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although the judgment primarily concerned factual findings, the case involved important policy considerations and emotional consequences that could have influenced the initial decision. Recognizing the significance of the matter to the parties and the potential for error in drawing inferences, the court determined that fairness required another court to review the judgment. Both parties agreed that the Supreme Court of Appeal was the appropriate forum. Despite reservations about burdening the appellate court with factual issues, the court concluded that the appeal should proceed to the Supreme Court of Appeal and granted leave accordingly.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal directed to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs in the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to appeal against the judgment and order delivered on 18 February 2011.
  • The appeal is directed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.