Sheriff of the High Court of South Africa, Alberton v Nlapo (53977/2012) [2014] ZAGPPHC 273 (14 April 2014)
The court held that, in terms of rule 46(11) of the Uniform Rules of Court, the sheriff is not required to file a report and application if it results in unnecessary costs. The application was granted only in respect of prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion, and the applicant was directed to keep the deposit paid...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] ZAGPPHC 273
- Parties
- Applicant: Sheriff of the High Court of South Africa, Alberton; Respondent: Bhekisisa Nhlapo; Plaintiff: Standard Bank of South Africa; Defendant: Carlostaulo Phuthi
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 53977/2012
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Application Under Rule 46(11) of the Uniform Rules of Court
- Outcome
- Application granted in part; prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion are granted; deposit to be kept in trust; prayers 4, 5, and 6 postponed sine die.
- Judges
- Janse van Nieuwenhuizen
- Legal Topics
- Rule 46 Uniform Rules, Sheriff Report, Costs in Application
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sheriff of the High Court of South Africa, Alberton
Applicant
Bhekisisa Nhlapo
Respondent
Standard Bank of South Africa
Plaintiff
Carlostaulo Phuthi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application Under Rule 46(11) of the Uniform Rules of Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sheriff is required to file a report and application under rule 46(11) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
- 2 Whether the incurring of unnecessary costs through such application is justified.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that, in terms of rule 46(11) of the Uniform Rules of Court, the sheriff is not required to file a report and application if it results in unnecessary costs. The application was granted only in respect of prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion, and the applicant was directed to keep the deposit paid by the respondent in trust pending finalisation of the application. Prayers 4, 5, and 6 were postponed sine die. The court relied on the precedent set in Sheriff, Hlabisa and Nongoma v Shobeka, confirming that unnecessary procedural steps and costs should be avoided.
Court Disposition
Application granted in part; prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion are granted; deposit to be kept in trust; prayers 4, 5, and 6 postponed sine die.
Orders
- An order is granted in terms of prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion.
- The applicant is directed to keep on trust the deposit paid by the respondent, pending the finalisation of the application.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
IN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA
(REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA)
Case No: 53977/2012
Date: 14 April 2014
In the matter between:
THE SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
ALBERTON..................................................................................................................................Applicant
and
BHEKISISA NHLAPO..............................................................................................................Respondent
In re -
STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA.................................................................................Plaintiff
CARLOSTAULO PHUTHI........................................................................................................Defendant
JUDGMENT
JANSE VAN NIEUWENHUIZEN J
[1] This is an application in terms of the provisions of rule 46(11) of the Uniform rules of court.
[2] In terms of the rule, the sheriff should file a report and an application, which result in the incurring of unnecessary costs, is not necessary. [See: Sheriff, Hlabisa and Nongoma v Shobeka 2009 (6) SA 272 (KZN)].
ORDER
In the premises, I make the following order:
1. An order is granted in terms of prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion.
2. The applicant is directed to keep on trust the deposit paid by the respondent, pending the finalisation of the application.
3. Prayers 4, 5 and 6 is postponed sine die.
JUDGE OF THE GAUTENG HIGH COURT OF SOUTH-AFRICA