Single Destination Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Another v Heever N.O and Others (42818/2012) [2023] ZAGPJHC 319 (12 April 2023)

Single Destination Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Another v Heever N.O and Others (42818/2012) [2023] ZAGPJHC 319 (12 April 2023)

The court found that the respondents are peregrini residing outside South Africa with no assets in the country, making it difficult for the applicants to recover costs if ordered. The respondents admit to having the means to pay, and there is no indication of impecuniosity. The applicants, one of whom is in business rescue, would face significant difficulty pursuing costs abroad. The court held that the primary consideration is the domicile of the respondents, and in these circumstances, it is appropriate to order security for costs. The issue of whether the intervention is vexatious was not determinative at this stage, but the risk to the applicants justified the order. The respondents...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 319
Parties
Applicant: Single Destination Engineering (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Guardian Integrated Systems CC; Respondent: Johannes Jacobus Hendrik Steyn; Respondent: Gunter Donald Freyer; Respondent: Theo van den Heever N.O.; Respondent: Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O.; Respondent: Thea Christina Lourens N.O.
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 April 2023
Case Number
42818/2012
Procedural Posture
Security for Costs Application / Application for Security for Costs in Intervention Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted. Respondents ordered to provide security for costs.
Judges
MIA
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Peregrinus Litigants, Rule 47 Application
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Peregrinus Litigants Rule 47 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Single Destination Engineering (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Guardian Integrated Systems CC

Applicant

Johannes Jacobus Hendrik Steyn

Respondent

Gunter Donald Freyer

Respondent

Theo van den Heever N.O.

Respondent

Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O.

Respondent

Thea Christina Lourens N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Security for Costs Application / Application for Security for Costs in Intervention Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the intervening applicants' defences are vexatious.
  2. 2 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that the applicants may not be able to recoup costs from the intervening applicants.
  3. 3 Whether, considering all circumstances, the intervening applicants should be required to provide security for costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents are peregrini residing outside South Africa with no assets in the country, making it difficult for the applicants to recover costs if ordered. The respondents admit to having the means to pay, and there is no indication of impecuniosity. The applicants, one of whom is in business rescue, would face significant difficulty pursuing costs abroad. The court held that the primary consideration is the domicile of the respondents, and in these circumstances, it is appropriate to order security for costs. The issue of whether the intervention is vexatious was not determinative at this stage, but the risk to the applicants justified the order. The respondents...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Respondents ordered to provide security for costs.

Orders

  • The respondents are ordered to provide security to the applicants in the amount of R169,042.50 within 10 days of this order.
  • The proceedings of the intervention application are stayed pending compliance with the security order.