Tukayi v Minister of Defence (52546/2014) [2020] ZAGPPHC 77 (24 February 2020)

Tukayi v Minister of Defence (52546/2014) [2020] ZAGPPHC 77 (24 February 2020)

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the criteria for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. There were no reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different decision, nor were any compelling reasons presented for the appeal to be heard. The court also determined that there was no basis to depart from the usual order that costs follow the result. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 77
Parties
Applicant: Melumzi Tukayi; Respondent: The Minister of Defence
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 February 2020
Case Number
52546/2014
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Wanless
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Costs Order, Superior Courts Act, Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs Order Superior Courts Act 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

Melumzi Tukayi

Applicant

The Minister of Defence

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the criteria for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons for granting leave to appeal despite lack of prospects of success.
  3. 3 Whether costs should follow the result in the application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the criteria for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. There were no reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different decision, nor were any compelling reasons presented for the appeal to be heard. The court also determined that there was no basis to depart from the usual order that costs follow the result. 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.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal.