Prins v Road Accident Fund (21261/08) [2013] ZAGPJHC 107 (7 April 2013)

Prins v Road Accident Fund (21261/08) [2013] ZAGPJHC 107 (7 April 2013)

The court found that, after examining the grounds of the intended appeal and considering counsel's submissions, there are reasonable prospects that another court may view the matter differently. The first ground of appeal was withdrawn by the applicant's counsel. The ongoing delays caused by the conduct of Road Accident Fund employees were noted as a matter warranting judicial attention. Consequently, leave to appeal was granted to the full bench of the court, with costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.

Citation
[2013] ZAGPJHC 107
Parties
Plaintiff: Yvette Mercelle Prins; Defendant: Road Accident Fund; Applicant: Shane Roux
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 April 2013
Case Number
21261/08
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 23 March 2013.
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the full bench of the South Gauteng High Court. Costs of the application are to be costs in the appeal.
Judges
P M Mojapelo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Costs in the Appeal, Civil Trial Roll Management
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs in the Appeal Civil Trial Roll Management

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yvette Mercelle Prins

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Shane Roux

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Delivered on 23 March 2013.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment delivered on 23 March 2013 as it pertains to the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of Road Accident Fund employees in causing delays warrants judicial scrutiny and intervention.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, after examining the grounds of the intended appeal and considering counsel's submissions, there are reasonable prospects that another court may view the matter differently. The first ground of appeal was withdrawn by the applicant's counsel. The ongoing delays caused by the conduct of Road Accident Fund employees were noted as a matter warranting judicial attention. Consequently, leave to appeal was granted to the full bench of the court, with costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the full bench of the South Gauteng High Court. Costs of the application are to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted to the full bench of this court.
  • The costs of this application shall be costs in the appeal.