Ndodana Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd and Others v South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited and Others (B3733/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 448 (2 May 2025)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Costs Determination Following Main Review Judgment and Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

1. 1 Which party is liable for the costs of the Ndodana application to compel a confidentiality agreement and production of the Rule 53 record.
2. 2 Whether Ndodana is entitled to costs as if the application was opposed.
3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the first urgent Ingerop application and Ndodana's counter application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Ndodana was entitled to costs for its application to compel SANRAL to conclude a confidentiality agreement and produce the Rule 53 record, as SANRAL's delay necessitated the litigation. Although the application was not opposed, the costs are to be paid on scale C, including those for senior counsel, but not specifically as if the matter was opposed; the Taxation Master retains discretion. Ingerop's first urgent application was deemed ill-conceived, and Ndodana's opposition justified, resulting in Ingerop being liable for Ndodana's costs for both the urgent application and the counter application, also on scale C. For the second urgent Ingerop application, the court...

Court Disposition

Costs orders granted in favour of Ndodana against SANRAL and Ingerop for specified applications; each party to pay own costs for the second urgent Ingerop application.

Orders

• SANRAL is to pay Ndodana's costs on scale C, including costs for Senior Counsel, for the application to compel a confidentiality regime and production of the Rule 53 record.
• Ingerop (second, third, and fourth respondents) is to pay Ndodana's costs of the first urgent application and the counter application, on scale C including costs for Senior Counsel.