Minister of Defence & Military Veterans and Others v Mollele and Others (66615/12) [2015] ZAGPPHC 990 (27 October 2015)

Minister of Defence & Military Veterans and Others v Mollele and Others (66615/12) [2015] ZAGPPHC 990 (27 October 2015)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a reasonable and satisfactory explanation for their repeated non-compliance with court orders and procedural requirements. The delays were due to gross neglect and dereliction of duty by both the applicants and their attorney, which could not be condoned. The applicants did not demonstrate bona fides or prospects of success in the main case, as the administrative decisions in question were reviewable under PAJA and the respondents' rights to procedural fairness were disregarded. The default judgment was properly granted, and the applicants could not escape responsibility for their attorney's egregious failures. Accordingly, condonation...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 990
Parties
Applicant: Minister of Defence & Military Veterans; Applicant: The Secretary for Defence; Applicant: The Chief of the SANDF; Applicant: The Chief of the SA Air Force; Respondent: Kenneth Pule Mollele; Respondent: Mpho Macmillan Tlatsana; Respondent: AOA Mokhosi; Respondent: Bongumusa Wellington Praise-God Mntambo
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 October 2015
Case Number
66615/12
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment and Condonation
Outcome
Rescission application dismissed with costs; condonation refused.
Judges
Nowosenetz L
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Condonation, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Default Judgment, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Rescission of Judgment Condonation Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Default Judgment Procedural Fairness

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister of Defence & Military Veterans

Applicant

The Secretary for Defence

Applicant

The Chief of the SANDF

Applicant

The Chief of the SA Air Force

Applicant

Kenneth Pule Mollele

Respondent

Mpho Macmillan Tlatsana

Respondent

AOA Mokhosi

Respondent

Bongumusa Wellington Praise-God Mntambo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the answering affidavit and rescission application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for rescission of the default judgment.
  3. 3 Whether the administrative decisions in question were reviewable under PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a reasonable and satisfactory explanation for their repeated non-compliance with court orders and procedural requirements. The delays were due to gross neglect and dereliction of duty by both the applicants and their attorney, which could not be condoned. The applicants did not demonstrate bona fides or prospects of success in the main case, as the administrative decisions in question were reviewable under PAJA and the respondents' rights to procedural fairness were disregarded. The default judgment was properly granted, and the applicants could not escape responsibility for their attorney's egregious failures. Accordingly, condonation...

Court Disposition

Rescission application dismissed with costs; condonation refused.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the applicants’ answering affidavit is refused.
  • Condonation for the late filing of the rescission application is refused.