Standard Bank of South Africa v Ntsumi Telecommunications (40868/19) [2022] ZAGPJHC 471 (18 July 2022)

Standard Bank of South Africa v Ntsumi Telecommunications (40868/19) [2022] ZAGPJHC 471 (18 July 2022)

The court found that the points raised in the application for leave to appeal had already been fully analysed and rejected in the previous judgment and in BP Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Intertrans Oil SA (Pty) Ltd & Others. The judge concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 471
Parties
Applicant: Standard Bank of South Africa; Respondent: Ntsumii Telecommunications; Respondent: Mayir Tayob Eno & Solly Mndlondobozi
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
40868/19
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused with costs.
Judges
Wepener
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Prospects of Success Costs Order

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Standard Bank of South Africa

Applicant

Ntsumii Telecommunications

Respondent

Mayir Tayob Eno & Solly Mndlondobozi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment Delivered

  1. 1 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment delivered on 16 March 2021.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the points raised in the application for leave to appeal had already been fully analysed and rejected in the previous judgment and in BP Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Intertrans Oil SA (Pty) Ltd & Others. The judge concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different decision. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused with costs.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.