Nel v Davis NO and Another (50948/2011) [2016] ZAGPPHC 974 (31 October 2016)

Nel v Davis NO and Another (50948/2011) [2016] ZAGPPHC 974 (31 October 2016)

The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The parties did not agree to exclude non-monetary contributions in the calculation of 'net proceeds', and the common law principles regarding partnership dissolution applied. The statutory threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act is higher than the common law test, requiring a finding that the appeal would have reasonable prospects of success. The court found no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 974
Parties
Applicant: Anita Helena Nel; Respondent: Norman Davis SC N.O.; Respondent: Andries de Bruyn
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 October 2016
Case Number
50948/2011
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
T.M. Makgoka
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospects of Success Superior Courts Act Costs Order

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

Anita Helena Nel

Applicant

Norman Davis SC N.O.

Respondent

Andries de Bruyn

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court might reach a different conclusion on the merits of the main judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The parties did not agree to exclude non-monetary contributions in the calculation of 'net proceeds', and the common law principles regarding partnership dissolution applied. The statutory threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act is higher than the common law test, requiring a finding that the appeal would have reasonable prospects of success. The court found no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and dismissed the application for leave to appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.