Skole-Ondersteuningsten Sentrum NPC and Others v Minister of Social Development and Others (24258/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 639 (23 October 2020)

Skole-Ondersteuningsten Sentrum NPC and Others v Minister of Social Development and Others (24258/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 639 (23 October 2020)

The court clarified that the costs order in the original judgment was always intended to be against the first respondent, including the reserved costs and the costs of two counsel. As no submissions were received from any party after being given an opportunity, the court confirmed and supplemented its original order to ensure clarity and proper execution. The first respondent is ordered to pay the applicants' and amicus curiae's costs on an attorney and client scale, including the reserved costs and costs of two counsel.

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 639
Parties
Applicant: Skole-Ondersteuningsentrum NPC; Applicant: Bronkieland Kleuterskool; Applicant: Solidarity; Respondent: Minister of Social Development; Respondent: Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Minister of Basic Education
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Case Number
24258/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Post Judgment Clarification and Costs Order
Outcome
Order granted clarifying and supplementing the original judgment regarding costs.
Judges
Fabricius
Legal Topics
Costs Order, Attorney and Client Scale, Reserved Costs, Clarification of Judgment
Civil Procedure Costs Order Attorney and Client Scale Reserved Costs Clarification of Judgment

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Skole-Ondersteuningsentrum NPC

Applicant

Bronkieland Kleuterskool

Applicant

Solidarity

Applicant

Minister of Social Development

Respondent

Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Minister of Basic Education

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Post Judgment Clarification and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original judgment's costs order required clarification regarding the party liable and the scale of costs.
  2. 2 Whether the reserved costs and costs of two counsel should be included in the costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court clarified that the costs order in the original judgment was always intended to be against the first respondent, including the reserved costs and the costs of two counsel. As no submissions were received from any party after being given an opportunity, the court confirmed and supplemented its original order to ensure clarity and proper execution. The first respondent is ordered to pay the applicants' and amicus curiae's costs on an attorney and client scale, including the reserved costs and costs of two counsel.

Court Disposition

Order granted clarifying and supplementing the original judgment regarding costs.

Orders

  • The addition to the original judgment must be read with the judgment delivered on 6 July 2020.
  • The first respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the applicants and the amicus curiae on an attorney and client scale, including the reserved costs and the costs of two counsel.