Songelwa v President and Others (76579/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 620 (14 November 2019)

Songelwa v President and Others (76579/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 620 (14 November 2019)

The court found that the urgent application brought by Mr Mangolele in the name of his minor child was a continuation of a pattern of vexatious and abusive litigation. The application lacked any evidence of harassment or urgency and was used as a vehicle to pursue Mr Mangolele's personal grievances against various state officials. The court emphasized its inherent power to prevent abuse of process and noted that the applicant had repeatedly disregarded proper procedures, including previous orders striking similar applications from the roll. The use of the child's persona to advance unrelated claims was found to be improper and unjustifiable. Accordingly, the application was dismissed as...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 620
Parties
Applicant: Alutha Songelwa; Respondent: The President & 9 Others
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 November 2019
Case Number
76579/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application Dismissed on Urgent Roll
Outcome
Application dismissed as an abuse of process.
Judges
Davis
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Urgent Application, Vexatious Litigation, Protection From Harassment Act
Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Urgent Application Vexatious Litigation Protection From Harassment Act

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alutha Songelwa

Applicant

The President & 9 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application Dismissed on Urgent Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the urgent application brought in the name of the minor child constitutes an abuse of court process.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to relief under the Protection from Harassment Act based on the evidence presented.
  3. 3 Whether repeated litigation by Mr Mangolele amounts to vexatious proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the urgent application brought by Mr Mangolele in the name of his minor child was a continuation of a pattern of vexatious and abusive litigation. The application lacked any evidence of harassment or urgency and was used as a vehicle to pursue Mr Mangolele's personal grievances against various state officials. The court emphasized its inherent power to prevent abuse of process and noted that the applicant had repeatedly disregarded proper procedures, including previous orders striking similar applications from the roll. The use of the child's persona to advance unrelated claims was found to be improper and unjustifiable. Accordingly, the application was dismissed as...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed as an abuse of process.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.