Special Investigation Unit (SIU) and Others v Lekabe (GP09/2019) [2021] ZAST 8 (23 August 2021)

Special Investigation Unit (SIU) and Others v Lekabe (GP09/2019) [2021] ZAST 8 (23 August 2021)

The Tribunal found that the defendant's notice of bar in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) was an irregular step, as the rule only applies to pleadings and not to exceptions. The Tribunal held that where its own rules are silent, it may invoke the Uniform rules of the High Court, specifically Uniform rule 23 regarding exceptions. The plaintiffs were not obliged to respond to the defendant's notice of exception, and the only proper step for the defendant was to deliver the exception and set it down for hearing. The defendant's conduct was found to be inconsistent with both the Tribunal and Uniform rules, and his approach unnecessarily protracted the litigation. The Tribunal dismissed the...

Citation
[2021] ZAST 8
Parties
Plaintiff: Special Investigating Unit (SIU); Plaintiff: Minister of Police; Plaintiff: Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; Defendant: Kgosisephuthabatho Gustav Lekabe
Court
Special Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 August 2021
Case Number
GP09/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Exception and Irregular Step Applications Before the Special Tribunal
Outcome
Defendant's application in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) dismissed; costs awarded against defendant.
Judges
T. Siwendu
Legal Topics
Special Tribunals Act, Exception Procedure, Judicial Case Management, Application of Uniform Rules
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Special Tribunals Act Exception Procedure Judicial Case Management Application of Uniform Rules

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Special Investigating Unit (SIU)

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Plaintiff

Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Plaintiff

Kgosisephuthabatho Gustav Lekabe

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Exception and Irregular Step Applications Before the Special Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's notice of bar in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) was an irregular step.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should apply Uniform rule 23 regarding exceptions where there is a lacuna in its own rules.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs were obliged to respond to the defendant's notice of exception.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the defendant's notice of bar in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) was an irregular step, as the rule only applies to pleadings and not to exceptions. The Tribunal held that where its own rules are silent, it may invoke the Uniform rules of the High Court, specifically Uniform rule 23 regarding exceptions. The plaintiffs were not obliged to respond to the defendant's notice of exception, and the only proper step for the defendant was to deliver the exception and set it down for hearing. The defendant's conduct was found to be inconsistent with both the Tribunal and Uniform rules, and his approach unnecessarily protracted the litigation. The Tribunal dismissed the...

Court Disposition

Defendant's application in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) dismissed; costs awarded against defendant.

Orders

  • The defendant’s application brought in terms of Tribunal rule 13(7) is dismissed.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the above application, with appearance costs for the day limited to the costs of Junior Counsel.