Rokwil Civils (Pty) Ltd and Others v Le Sueur N.O and Others (D3176/2020) [2020] ZAKZDHC 61 (25 August 2020)

Rokwil Civils (Pty) Ltd and Others v Le Sueur N.O and Others (D3176/2020) [2020] ZAKZDHC 61 (25 August 2020)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide any factual basis for urgency, having been aware of the lapse of the Share Sale agreement and their rights since July 2019 but only acting in May 2020. The delay was unexplained and unjustified, and the applicants did not demonstrate that they could not obtain substantial redress at a hearing in due course. The urgency was self-created, and the application constituted an abuse of process by seeking preferential treatment over other litigants. The court held that the requirements for urgent relief were not met and that the application should be struck from the roll for want of urgency, with costs including those of senior counsel.

Citation
[2020] ZAKZDHC 61
Parties
Applicant: Rokwil Civils (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Roderick Robert Stainton N.O.; Applicant: David Alistair Stainton N.O.; Applicant: Peter Cecil Odgers N.O.; Respondent: Robert Anthony Le Sueur N.O.; Respondent: Karen Mary Le Sueur N.O.; Respondent: Christopher Rex Le Sueur N.O.; Respondent: Desert Star Trading 549 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 2020
Case Number
D3176/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Strike From Roll for Want of Urgency
Outcome
Application struck from the roll for want of urgency with costs, including costs of senior counsel.
Judges
Steyn
Legal Topics
Urgent Interdict, Self Created Urgency, Abuse of Process, Rule 6 12, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Urgent Interdict Self Created Urgency Abuse of Process Rule 6 12 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rokwil Civils (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Roderick Robert Stainton N.O.

Applicant

David Alistair Stainton N.O.

Applicant

Peter Cecil Odgers N.O.

Applicant

Robert Anthony Le Sueur N.O.

Respondent

Karen Mary Le Sueur N.O.

Respondent

Christopher Rex Le Sueur N.O.

Respondent

Desert Star Trading 549 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Strike From Roll for Want of Urgency

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application brought by the applicants is urgent and should be heard as such.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient justification for non-compliance with the rules governing urgent applications.
  3. 3 Whether the alleged urgency is self-created and constitutes an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide any factual basis for urgency, having been aware of the lapse of the Share Sale agreement and their rights since July 2019 but only acting in May 2020. The delay was unexplained and unjustified, and the applicants did not demonstrate that they could not obtain substantial redress at a hearing in due course. The urgency was self-created, and the application constituted an abuse of process by seeking preferential treatment over other litigants. The court held that the requirements for urgent relief were not met and that the application should be struck from the roll for want of urgency, with costs including those of senior counsel.

Court Disposition

Application struck from the roll for want of urgency with costs, including costs of senior counsel.

Orders

  • The application is struck from the roll for want of urgency with costs, such costs to include costs of senior counsel.