Road Accident Fund v Auditor-General of South Africa (Leave to Appeal) (1452/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 307 (4 May 2022)

Road Accident Fund v Auditor-General of South Africa (Leave to Appeal) (1452/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 307 (4 May 2022)

The court found that, upon consideration of the written heads of argument and oral submissions, the applicant had demonstrated a reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the order dismissing the initial application. The court applied the heightened threshold for granting leave to appeal as set out in section 17 of the Superior Courts Act and relevant case law, and concluded that the applicant satisfied the requirements for leave to appeal. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal was granted, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 307
Parties
Applicant: Road Accident Fund; Respondent: Auditor-General of South Africa
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 May 2022
Case Number
1452/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Initial Application
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Judges
C Collis
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospect of Success, Costs in the Appeal
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospect of Success Costs in the 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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Road Accident Fund

Applicant

Auditor-General of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Initial Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard, including conflicting judgments.
  3. 3 Whether the threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act has been met.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, upon consideration of the written heads of argument and oral submissions, the applicant had demonstrated a reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding the order dismissing the initial application. The court applied the heightened threshold for granting leave to appeal as set out in section 17 of the Superior Courts Act and relevant case law, and concluded that the applicant satisfied the requirements for leave to appeal. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal was granted, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
  • Costs, including costs of two counsel, to be costs in the appeal.