Van der Merwe and Others v Van Wyk Auditors and Others (48149/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 798 (24 October 2022)

Van der Merwe and Others v Van Wyk Auditors and Others (48149/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 798 (24 October 2022)

The court found that, although the applicants raised several grounds for leave to appeal, the argument concerning the application of the principles from Dabelstein v Hildebrandt in the context of Anton Piller applications was sufficient to establish reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The judge determined that leave to appeal should be granted, but agreed with the respondents that the appropriate forum is the Supreme Court of Appeal rather than the Full Court of the division. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 798
Parties
Applicant: Paul Johannes van der Merwe; Applicant: Estelle Kathleen van der Merwe; Applicant: Cornelis Jansen van der Merwe; Applicant: Estelle Kathleen van der Merwe N.O.; Applicant: Paul Johannes van der Merwe N.O.; Applicant: Stoffel van der Merwe N.O.; Applicant: Cornelis Jansen van der Merwe N.O.; Applicant: Jan van der Merwe N.O.; Applicant: Limpopo West Farming and Business Enterprises (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Elletse Ondernemings (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Van Wyk Auditors; Respondent: Justus van Wyk; Respondent: Van Wyk Bestuursdienste (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 October 2022
Case Number
48149/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 18 July 2022.
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Judges
Neukircher
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Anton Piller Application, Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Anton Piller Application Prospects of Success Superior Courts Act

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Johannes van der Merwe

Applicant

Estelle Kathleen van der Merwe

Applicant

Cornelis Jansen van der Merwe

Applicant

Estelle Kathleen van der Merwe N.O.

Applicant

Paul Johannes van der Merwe N.O.

Applicant

Stoffel van der Merwe N.O.

Applicant

Cornelis Jansen van der Merwe N.O.

Applicant

Jan van der Merwe N.O.

Applicant

Limpopo West Farming and Business Enterprises (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Elletse Ondernemings (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Van Wyk Auditors

Respondent

Justus van Wyk

Respondent

Van Wyk Bestuursdienste (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 18 July 2022.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order delivered on 18 July 2022.
  2. 2 Whether the principles in Dabelstein v Hildebrandt regarding Anton Piller applications were correctly applied.
  3. 3 To which court leave to appeal should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although the applicants raised several grounds for leave to appeal, the argument concerning the application of the principles from Dabelstein v Hildebrandt in the context of Anton Piller applications was sufficient to establish reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The judge determined that leave to appeal should be granted, but agreed with the respondents that the appropriate forum is the Supreme Court of Appeal rather than the Full Court of the division. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal; costs to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

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