Afgri Grain Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Trustees for the time being of Copenship Bulkers A/S (in liquidation) and Others (797/2018) [2019] ZASCA 104 (23 August 2019)

Afgri Grain Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Trustees for the time being of Copenship Bulkers A/S (in liquidation) and Others (797/2018) [2019] ZASCA 104 (23 August 2019)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the inclusion of the costs of the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 in the costs order was erroneous. The court was not seized with the question of costs for the s 18(3) application, as leave to appeal against those portions of the order had not been sought or granted, and the appellant did not exercise its automatic right of appeal. Accordingly, the order was amended by deleting the reference to the costs of the s 18(3) application.

Citation
[2019] ZASCA 104
Parties
Appellant: Afgri Grain Marketing (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Trustees for the time being of Copenship Bulkers A/S (in liquidation); Respondent: Trustees for the time being of Copenship MPP A/S (in liquidation); Respondent: Trustees for the time being of Copenship Management A/S (in liquidation); Respondent: ABSA Bank Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 August 2019
Case Number
797/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Variation of Costs Order
Outcome
Order amended to delete reference to costs of the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
Judges
Wallis, Van der Merwe, Mocumie, Schippers, Mokgohloa
Legal Topics
Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act, Variation of Costs Order, Superior Courts Act, Security Arrest, Leave to Appeal
Admiralty and Maritime Civil Procedure Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act Variation of Costs Order Superior Courts Act Security Arrest Leave to Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Afgri Grain Marketing (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Trustees for the time being of Copenship Bulkers A/S (in liquidation)

Respondent

Trustees for the time being of Copenship MPP A/S (in liquidation)

Respondent

Trustees for the time being of Copenship Management A/S (in liquidation)

Respondent

ABSA Bank Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Variation of Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order granted in the appeal erroneously included costs relating to the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
  2. 2 Whether the Supreme Court of Appeal was seized with the question of costs for the s 18(3) application.
  3. 3 Whether the order should be amended to delete the reference to costs of the s 18(3) application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the inclusion of the costs of the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 in the costs order was erroneous. The court was not seized with the question of costs for the s 18(3) application, as leave to appeal against those portions of the order had not been sought or granted, and the appellant did not exercise its automatic right of appeal. Accordingly, the order was amended by deleting the reference to the costs of the s 18(3) application.

Court Disposition

Order amended to delete reference to costs of the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.

Orders

  • Paragraph 2(b) of the order is amended by the deletion of the words 'and the costs of the application in terms of s 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013'.