Sithelo and Another v Premier of the Eastern Cape Province and Others (2607/2022) [2024] ZAECMHC 37 (21 May 2024)

Sithelo and Another v Premier of the Eastern Cape Province and Others (2607/2022) [2024] ZAECMHC 37 (21 May 2024)

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the grounds of appeal were not clearly and succinctly stated as required by Rule 49. The court found that the application was properly dismissed for undue delay and lack of condonation, as the relief sought, although framed as a declaratory order, was in substance a review and thus subject to the same procedural requirements. The matter was also found to be res judicata, as it involved the same parties and cause of action as previous litigation. The court exercised its discretion regarding costs appropriately, and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting interference. The applicant failed to demonstrate any prospects of...

Citation
[2024] ZAECMHC 37
Parties
Applicant: Thulani Patrick Sithelo; Applicant: Sithelo Royal Family; Respondent: Premier of the Eastern Cape Province; Respondent: MEC for Co-operative Governance & Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Gwadiso Khiwa Royal Family; Respondent: Dumisani Gwadiso; Respondent: Mpumalanga Gwadiso; Respondent: Thozamile Sithelo
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 May 2024
Case Number
2607/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment and Order of Notyesi AJ Dated 9 April 2024
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
B R Tokota
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Condonation, Res Judicata, Unreasonable Delay Rule, Declaratory Order
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Leave to Appeal Condonation Res Judicata Unreasonable Delay Rule Declaratory 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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thulani Patrick Sithelo

Applicant

Sithelo Royal Family

Applicant

Premier of the Eastern Cape Province

Respondent

MEC for Co-operative Governance & Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Gwadiso Khiwa Royal Family

Respondent

Dumisani Gwadiso

Respondent

Mpumalanga Gwadiso

Respondent

Thozamile Sithelo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment and Order of Notyesi AJ Dated 9 April 2024

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the grounds for leave to appeal are clearly and succinctly stated as required by Rule 49.
  2. 2 Whether the application was properly dismissed for undue delay and lack of condonation.
  3. 3 Whether the matter is res judicata due to previous litigation on the same cause of action.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the grounds of appeal were not clearly and succinctly stated as required by Rule 49. The court found that the application was properly dismissed for undue delay and lack of condonation, as the relief sought, although framed as a declaratory order, was in substance a review and thus subject to the same procedural requirements. The matter was also found to be res judicata, as it involved the same parties and cause of action as previous litigation. The court exercised its discretion regarding costs appropriately, and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting interference. The applicant failed to demonstrate any prospects of...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.