Van den Heever v Taljaard N.O. and Another (54704/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 426 (14 March 2017)

Van den Heever v Taljaard N.O. and Another (54704/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 426 (14 March 2017)

The court found that the grounds for leave to appeal raised by the applicant present reasonable prospects of success and involve pertinent questions of law. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. The respondents' attempt to move a counter-application for leave to appeal the costs order was declined due to procedural irregularity, as no proper application was before the court.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 426
Parties
Applicant: Johannes Van den Heever; Respondent: Louis Marius Taljaard N.O.; Respondent: Chebo Chaza N.O.
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 March 2017
Case Number
54704/2013
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. The respondents' oral counter-application for leave to appeal the costs order is declined.
Judges
AC Basson
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Costs Order, Prospects of Success
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs Order Prospects of Success

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johannes Van den Heever

Applicant

Louis Marius Taljaard N.O.

Respondent

Chebo Chaza N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' oral counter-application for leave to appeal the costs order should be entertained.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grounds for leave to appeal raised by the applicant present reasonable prospects of success and involve pertinent questions of law. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. The respondents' attempt to move a counter-application for leave to appeal the costs order was declined due to procedural irregularity, as no proper application was before the court.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. The respondents' oral counter-application for leave to appeal the costs order is declined.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.
  • Costs to be costs in the appeal.