Sable Place Properties 106 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Visa Security Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (081761-2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 764 (18 July 2025)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Urgent Interdict and Ejectment Order

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the first respondent has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the urgent interdict and ejectment order.
2. 2 Whether the court erred in adjudicating disputes of fact in application proceedings, particularly regarding the alleged agreement between the parties.
3. 3 Whether the Plascon-Evans rule was correctly applied to the facts.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first respondent failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The application for leave to appeal was based on alleged errors in the adjudication of disputes of fact and the application of the Plascon-Evans rule. However, the court held that the facts and law did not support the existence of a valid agreement entitling the first respondent to remain on the property, and no material dispute of fact existed that would warrant a different outcome. The threshold for granting leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act was not met, as there was no realistic chance that another court would reach a different conclusion. No...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on Scale C.

Orders

• The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
• The first respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal on Scale C.