Supaluck Investments (Pty) Ltd v Valuations Appeals Board City of Johannesburg (34752-2019) [2024] ZAGPJHC 463 (8 May 2024)

Supaluck Investments (Pty) Ltd v Valuations Appeals Board City of Johannesburg (34752-2019) [2024] ZAGPJHC 463 (8 May 2024)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for leave to appeal. The explanation for the delay in instituting the review was unreasonable and did not justify condonation under PAJA. The applicant's grounds for appeal were either meritless or raised for the first time on appeal without justification. The matter did not raise novel points of law or issues of significant public importance. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was refused and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 463
Parties
Applicant: Supaluck Investments (Pty) Ltd.; Respondent: Valuations Appeals Board: City of Johannesburg; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 May 2024
Case Number
34752/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused with costs.
Judges
Flatela
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Condonation for Late Review, Municipal Rates, Irrational Administrative Action, Interest of Justice Test
Administrative Law Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Condonation for Late Review Municipal Rates Irrational Administrative Action Interest of Justice Test

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

Parties

Supaluck Investments (Pty) Ltd.

Applicant

Valuations Appeals Board: City of Johannesburg

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown reasonable prospects of success for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there is a compelling reason for the appeal to be heard under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in instituting the review application should be condoned under PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for leave to appeal. The explanation for the delay in instituting the review was unreasonable and did not justify condonation under PAJA. The applicant's grounds for appeal were either meritless or raised for the first time on appeal without justification. The matter did not raise novel points of law or issues of significant public importance. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was refused and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of this application.