Salut La Vie (Edms) Bpk v GWK Properties (Edms) Bpk (2094/2010) [2010] ZANCHC 43 (17 September 2010)

Salut La Vie (Edms) Bpk v GWK Properties (Edms) Bpk (2094/2010) [2010] ZANCHC 43 (17 September 2010)

The court found that the grounds for appeal raised by the applicant were substantially the same as those already debated and decided in the summary judgment proceedings. The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal, either on the original grounds or on the basis of the proposed new evidence. The new evidence was not shown to be material or likely to affect the outcome, as it did not establish that the respondent was a party to any agreement regarding commission or mandate. The court concluded that there was no justification for admitting further evidence or granting leave to appeal, and that the costs should follow the result.

Citation
[2010] ZANCHC 43
Parties
Applicant: Salut La Vie (Edms) Bpk; Respondent: GWK Properties (Edms) Bpk
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2010
Case Number
2094/2010
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
C J Olivier
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Summary Judgment, Mandate, Commission Agreement
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Summary Judgment Mandate Commission Agreement

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salut La Vie (Edms) Bpk

Applicant

GWK Properties (Edms) Bpk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed further evidence is of sufficient relevance and materiality to justify its admission on appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds advanced in the notices of application for leave to appeal raise any new or unresolved issues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grounds for appeal raised by the applicant were substantially the same as those already debated and decided in the summary judgment proceedings. The applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospect of success on appeal, either on the original grounds or on the basis of the proposed new evidence. The new evidence was not shown to be material or likely to affect the outcome, as it did not establish that the respondent was a party to any agreement regarding commission or mandate. The court concluded that there was no justification for admitting further evidence or granting leave to appeal, and that the costs should follow the result.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

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