Sibanye Still Water N.O and Others v Xinshe (M98/2022) [2025] ZANWHC 102 (17 June 2025)

Sibanye Still Water N.O and Others v Xinshe (M98/2022) [2025] ZANWHC 102 (17 June 2025)

The respondent was required to file the request for written reasons within ten days of the order dated 20 March 2025, as stipulated by Rule 49(1)(c). The request was filed outside this period, and there was no evidence of consent from the applicants or an application for condonation under Rule 27. In the absence of compliance with the rules or a court order condoning the late filing, the request for written reasons is premature and cannot be entertained. The court is bound by the peremptory provisions of the Uniform Rules of Court and cannot grant relief where procedural requirements have not been met.

Citation
[2025] ZANWHC 102
Parties
Applicant: Sibanye Still Water N.O; Applicant: Amanda Zolisa Cuba N.O; Applicant: Muriel Siziwe Njokwene N.O; Respondent: Rueben Xinishe
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 June 2025
Case Number
M98/2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Order on Request for Written Reasons
Outcome
The request for written reasons for the order dated 20 March 2025 is premature and cannot be entertained.
Judges
T Masike
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Late Filing, Condonation, Uniform Rules of Court, Rule 49, Rule 27
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Late Filing Condonation Uniform Rules of Court Rule 49 Rule 27

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sibanye Still Water N.O

Applicant

Amanda Zolisa Cuba N.O

Applicant

Muriel Siziwe Njokwene N.O

Applicant

Rueben Xinishe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Order on Request for Written Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's request for written reasons for the order dated 20 March 2025 was filed within the period prescribed by Rule 49(1)(c).
  2. 2 Whether the late filing of the request for written reasons can be entertained without consent or condonation under Rule 27.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was required to file the request for written reasons within ten days of the order dated 20 March 2025, as stipulated by Rule 49(1)(c). The request was filed outside this period, and there was no evidence of consent from the applicants or an application for condonation under Rule 27. In the absence of compliance with the rules or a court order condoning the late filing, the request for written reasons is premature and cannot be entertained. The court is bound by the peremptory provisions of the Uniform Rules of Court and cannot grant relief where procedural requirements have not been met.

Court Disposition

The request for written reasons for the order dated 20 March 2025 is premature and cannot be entertained.

Orders

  • The request for written reasons for the order dated 20 March 2025 is premature and accordingly cannot be entertained.