University of Limpopo v Ambe and Another (1361/2020) [2020] ZALMPPHC 71 (25 August 2020)

University of Limpopo v Ambe and Another (1361/2020) [2020] ZALMPPHC 71 (25 August 2020)

The court found that the applicant was not in willful default, as the failure to file the answering affidavit and attend court was due to the negligence and inefficiency of its former attorney, not the applicant itself. The applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the default and demonstrated a bona fide defence with prospects of success, including irregularities in the first respondent's admission and the incompetence of the relief granted. The court held that the impugned order was manifestly unjust, as it conferred a degree on a person who did not qualify for enrolment. Accordingly, the requirements for rescission under Rule 31(2)(b) were satisfied, and the order was rescinded.

Citation
[2020] ZALMPPHC 71
Parties
Applicant: University of Limpopo; Respondent: Queen Ntombikayise Ambe; Respondent: Minister of Higher Education and Training
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 2020
Case Number
1361/2020
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment
Outcome
Application for rescission granted; the default judgment of 22 October 2019 is rescinded.
Judges
E M Makgoba
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Review of Administrative Action, Unlawful Conferral of Degree, Conflict of Interest
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Review of Administrative Action Unlawful Conferral of Degree Conflict of Interest

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

University of Limpopo

Applicant

Queen Ntombikayise Ambe

Respondent

Minister of Higher Education and Training

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for rescission of the default judgment granted on 22 October 2019.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was in willful default in failing to oppose the main application.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has a bona fide defence with prospects of success against the main application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was not in willful default, as the failure to file the answering affidavit and attend court was due to the negligence and inefficiency of its former attorney, not the applicant itself. The applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the default and demonstrated a bona fide defence with prospects of success, including irregularities in the first respondent's admission and the incompetence of the relief granted. The court held that the impugned order was manifestly unjust, as it conferred a degree on a person who did not qualify for enrolment. Accordingly, the requirements for rescission under Rule 31(2)(b) were satisfied, and the order was rescinded.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission granted; the default judgment of 22 October 2019 is rescinded.

Orders

  • The order granted under case number 2172/2019 on 22 October 2019 is rescinded.
  • The applicant is ordered to file an answering affidavit in the main application within 15 days from the date of this order.