Sercu and Others v Bota and Another (2023/053773) [2025] ZAGPJHC 65 (30 January 2025)

Sercu and Others v Bota and Another (2023/053773) [2025] ZAGPJHC 65 (30 January 2025)

The court found that the respondents failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The alleged changed circumstances were vague and did not justify the violation of the court order. The respondents had alternative remedies available but chose to take the law into their own hands, which cannot be countenanced in a constitutional democracy. The ongoing contempt and refusal to purge it further undermined their position. The application for leave to appeal was therefore refused, and costs were awarded on an attorney-client scale due to the vexatious nature of the continued litigation.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 65
Parties
Applicant: Sercu, Carl (Snr); Applicant: Sercu, Carl (Jnr); Applicant: Sercu, Charles; Respondent: Bota, Suhail; Respondent: Creative Link Engineering (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 January 2025
Case Number
2023/053773
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Contempt of Court Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney-client scale.
Judges
S A B Mahomed
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Urgent Application, Leave to Appeal, Attorney Client Costs
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Urgent Application Leave to Appeal Attorney Client Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sercu, Carl (Snr)

Applicant

Sercu, Carl (Jnr)

Applicant

Sercu, Charles

Applicant

Bota, Suhail

Respondent

Creative Link Engineering (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Contempt of Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents have reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the contempt of court order.
  2. 2 Whether changed circumstances justified the respondents' violation of the court order.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded on an attorney-client scale.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The alleged changed circumstances were vague and did not justify the violation of the court order. The respondents had alternative remedies available but chose to take the law into their own hands, which cannot be countenanced in a constitutional democracy. The ongoing contempt and refusal to purge it further undermined their position. The application for leave to appeal was therefore refused, and costs were awarded on an attorney-client scale due to the vexatious nature of the continued litigation.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney-client scale.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney client scale.