Strategic Partners Group Concessions (Pty) Ltd v Bombela Operating Company (Pty) Ltd and Others (2021/30068) [2023] ZAGPJHC 646 (6 June 2023)

Strategic Partners Group Concessions (Pty) Ltd v Bombela Operating Company (Pty) Ltd and Others (2021/30068) [2023] ZAGPJHC 646 (6 June 2023)

The Court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the review of the arbitration award. The Court held that the Arbitrator did consider and apply the tacit or implied term pleaded by the applicant, and that the applicant's arguments did not constitute valid grounds for review under the Arbitration Act. The Court concluded that there was no room for another interpretation of the award and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 646
Parties
Applicant: Strategic Partners Group Concessions (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Bombela Operating Company (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: RATP Development SA; Respondent: Retired Justice N V Hurt; Respondent: The Arbitration Foundation of South Africa
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2023
Case Number
2021/30068
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two Counsel.
Judges
B.C. Wanless
Legal Topics
Arbitration Review, Leave to Appeal, Interpretation of Awards, Tacit Terms
Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Review Leave to Appeal Interpretation of Awards Tacit Terms

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Strategic Partners Group Concessions (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Bombela Operating Company (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

RATP Development SA

Respondent

Retired Justice N V Hurt

Respondent

The Arbitration Foundation of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a reasonable possibility that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the review of the arbitration award.
  2. 2 Whether the Arbitrator failed to consider and apply the tacit or implied term pleaded by the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds advanced by the applicant constitute valid grounds for review under the Arbitration Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the review of the arbitration award. The Court held that the Arbitrator did consider and apply the tacit or implied term pleaded by the applicant, and that the applicant's arguments did not constitute valid grounds for review under the Arbitration Act. The Court concluded that there was no room for another interpretation of the award and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two Counsel.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs of the application, including the costs of two Counsel.