Sibidi and Others v Van As and Others (B2/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 466 (14 April 2025)

Sibidi and Others v Van As and Others (B2/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 466 (14 April 2025)

The court considered the grounds for leave to appeal and the arguments advanced by both parties. It found that the applicants had not raised any new or compelling points and that their grounds essentially repeated arguments already dealt with in the main judgment. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion or that there was an arguable point of law or compelling reason to grant leave. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of counsel on Scale B.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 466
Parties
Applicant: Nicky Sibidi; Applicant: Annah Mosella Motaung; Applicant: Frank Manyisi; Applicant: Phumza Mawathi Aloni; Applicant: Phila Sipele; Applicant: Siyabonga Ntiya; Respondent: Frederik Johannes Van As; Respondent: Frederik Johannes Van As N.O.; Respondent: Ferdinand Smartenryk Devenier N.O.; Respondent: Ogoerion Construction CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 April 2025
Case Number
B2/2024
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment and Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Strijdom
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Authority of Trustees, Locus Standi, Rule 7 Uniform Rules, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Authority of Trustees Locus Standi Rule 7 Uniform Rules Costs Order

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicky Sibidi

Applicant

Annah Mosella Motaung

Applicant

Frank Manyisi

Applicant

Phumza Mawathi Aloni

Applicant

Phila Sipele

Applicant

Siyabonga Ntiya

Applicant

Frederik Johannes Van As

Respondent

Frederik Johannes Van As N.O.

Respondent

Ferdinand Smartenryk Devenier N.O.

Respondent

Ogoerion Construction CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment and Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order dated 24 February 2025.
  2. 2 Whether the trustees of the Frikkie van As Family Trust had authority and locus standi.
  3. 3 Whether the fourth respondent was authorised to participate in the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court considered the grounds for leave to appeal and the arguments advanced by both parties. It found that the applicants had not raised any new or compelling points and that their grounds essentially repeated arguments already dealt with in the main judgment. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion or that there was an arguable point of law or compelling reason to grant leave. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of counsel on Scale B.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of counsel on Scale B.