Roux and Another v Magnolia Ridge Properties 197 (Pty) Ltd and Another (EL556/2012, ECD 1256/2012) [2015] ZAECELLC 6 (14 May 2015)

Roux and Another v Magnolia Ridge Properties 197 (Pty) Ltd and Another (EL556/2012, ECD 1256/2012) [2015] ZAECELLC 6 (14 May 2015)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The evidence, considered in its entirety, supported the respondents' case on a balance of probabilities. Minor errors in referencing the evidence were deemed insignificant and did not affect the outcome. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2015] ZAECELLC 6
Parties
Plaintiff: Kevin Glynn Roux; Plaintiff: Elizabeth Johanna Van Nierop; Defendant: Magnolia Ridge Properties 197 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Zambli 216 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 May 2015
Case Number
EL556/2012, ECD 1256/2012
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment in Trial Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
P.W. Tshiki
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Commission Agreement, Balance of Probabilities
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Commission Agreement Balance of Probabilities

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Glynn Roux

Plaintiff

Elizabeth Johanna Van Nierop

Plaintiff

Magnolia Ridge Properties 197 (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Zambli 216 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment in Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different conclusion on the evidence presented.
  2. 2 Whether errors in the evaluation of evidence justify granting leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The evidence, considered in its entirety, supported the respondents' case on a balance of probabilities. Minor errors in referencing the evidence were deemed insignificant and did not affect the outcome. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.