Steinman and Others v NSPCA and Others (3232/2019) [2023] ZANWHC 245 (17 November 2023)

Steinman and Others v NSPCA and Others (3232/2019) [2023] ZANWHC 245 (17 November 2023)

The court found that none of the grounds advanced by the applicants established jurisdiction over the 1st and 2nd defendants. The reading of the newspaper article within the jurisdiction does not confer jurisdiction. The amendment to the claim against the 3rd defendant was irregular and not compliant with Rule 28 of the Uniform Rules of Court. Applying the test in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act, the court concluded that there is no reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding jurisdiction. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Citation
[2023] ZANWHC 245
Parties
Applicant: Steinman, Jan Daniel; Applicant: Swarico Auctioneers (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Pienika CC; Respondent: NSPCA; Respondent: Wolhuter, DB; Respondent: MEC: North West Department of Rural Environment and Agricultural Development
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 November 2023
Case Number
3232/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Claims for Lack of Jurisdiction.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants, jointly and severally.
Judges
FMM Snyman
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Leave to Appeal, Special Plea, Uniform Rules of Court, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Jurisdiction Leave to Appeal Special Plea Uniform Rules of Court Costs 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steinman, Jan Daniel

Applicant

Swarico Auctioneers (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Pienika CC

Applicant

NSPCA

Respondent

Wolhuter, DB

Respondent

MEC: North West Department of Rural Environment and Agricultural Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Claims for Lack of Jurisdiction.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the North West High Court has jurisdiction over the claims against the 1st and 2nd defendants.
  2. 2 Whether the amendment of the claim against the 3rd defendant was regular and compliant with Rule 28 of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  3. 3 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the threshold set by section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that none of the grounds advanced by the applicants established jurisdiction over the 1st and 2nd defendants. The reading of the newspaper article within the jurisdiction does not confer jurisdiction. The amendment to the claim against the 3rd defendant was irregular and not compliant with Rule 28 of the Uniform Rules of Court. Applying the test in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act, the court concluded that there is no reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion regarding jurisdiction. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants, jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal jointly and severally, the one paying the others to be absolved.