Sheriff Pretoria Central v Minister of Police (67117/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 27 (19 January 2021)

Sheriff Pretoria Central v Minister of Police (67117/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 27 (19 January 2021)

The court found that the reserved costs incurred on 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 were a direct result of the respondent's attorneys' failure to respond adequately and timeously to the applicant's attorneys regarding the status of the matter. The court held that, on both occasions, the rule could have been extended by agreement, and there would have been no need for the applicant to brief counsel to attend court. The court determined that the costs should be awarded on an unopposed scale as the appearances were not in anticipation of an opposed hearing. The court declined to award costs on a punitive scale, finding that while the respondent's attorneys were tardy, their conduct did not...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 27
Parties
Applicant: Sheriff Pretoria Central; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 January 2021
Case Number
67117/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Costs Determination Following Reserved Costs on Interlocutory Dates
Outcome
Reserved costs of 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 unreserved and awarded to the applicant on an unopposed basis and on the scale as between party and party. Costs of the present application also awarded to the applicant on an unopposed basis.
Judges
Kollapen
Legal Topics
Reserved Costs, Party and Party Scale, Unopposed Application
Civil Procedure Reserved Costs Party and Party Scale Unopposed Application

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheriff Pretoria Central

Applicant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Costs Determination Following Reserved Costs on Interlocutory Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the reserved costs of 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 should be unreserved and awarded to the applicant.
  2. 2 On what scale the costs should be awarded.
  3. 3 Whether a punitive costs order is justified against the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the reserved costs incurred on 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 were a direct result of the respondent's attorneys' failure to respond adequately and timeously to the applicant's attorneys regarding the status of the matter. The court held that, on both occasions, the rule could have been extended by agreement, and there would have been no need for the applicant to brief counsel to attend court. The court determined that the costs should be awarded on an unopposed scale as the appearances were not in anticipation of an opposed hearing. The court declined to award costs on a punitive scale, finding that while the respondent's attorneys were tardy, their conduct did not...

Court Disposition

Reserved costs of 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 unreserved and awarded to the applicant on an unopposed basis and on the scale as between party and party. Costs of the present application also awarded to the applicant on an unopposed basis.

Orders

  • The reserved costs of 4 November 2019 and 2 March 2020 are unreserved and awarded in favour of the applicant (the 1st respondent in the main application) on an unopposed basis and on the scale as between party and party.
  • The costs of this application are awarded to the applicant on an unopposed basis.