Terblanche and Another v Oosthuizen (3670/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 509 (29 December 2023)

Terblanche and Another v Oosthuizen (3670/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 509 (29 December 2023)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The respondent did not admit to travelling on the prohibited route in breach of the interdict, nor did his conduct amount to assault as alleged by the applicants. The court held that the issues raised in the grounds of appeal had already been adequately addressed in the previous judgment and that there were no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2023] ZAFSHC 509
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Sophia Terblanche; Applicant: The Trustees for the Time Being of the Bloomplaats Trust, IT28/95; Respondent: Jacobus du Plessis Oosthuizen
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 December 2023
Case Number
3670/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Contempt Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
N S Daniso
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Contempt of Court, Interdict, Reasonable Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Contempt of Court Interdict Reasonable Prospects of Success

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Sophia Terblanche

Applicant

The Trustees for the Time Being of the Bloomplaats Trust, IT28/95

Applicant

Jacobus du Plessis Oosthuizen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the dismissal of their contempt application.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's conduct constituted contempt of the court order granted on 18 August 2022.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent admitted to assaulting the first applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The respondent did not admit to travelling on the prohibited route in breach of the interdict, nor did his conduct amount to assault as alleged by the applicants. The court held that the issues raised in the grounds of appeal had already been adequately addressed in the previous judgment and that there were no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.