Van Vuuren N.O and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (Leave to Appeal) (26135/2017) [2024] ZAGPPHC 832 (13 August 2024)
- Citation
- [2024] ZAGPPHC 832
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Panel
- Bokako
- Case number
- 26135/2017
More details
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Panel
- Bokako
- Case number
- 26135/2017
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that, having considered all the issues raised in the application for leave to appeal, there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of the applicants' claims for wrongful arrest, detention, and malicious prosecution. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is granted to the full bench of the Division.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted to the full bench of the Division.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this Division against the judgment and order of 14 February 2024 is granted.
- Costs of the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.
02
Material facts
Parties
Johanna Susanna Van Vuuren N.O.
Applicant Counsel: Adv BouwerJohanna Susanna Van Vuuren
Applicant Counsel: Adv BouwerDirector of Public Prosecutions
Respondent Counsel: Adv MosomaMinister of Police
Respondent Counsel: Adv Mosoma03
Procedural history
Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Wrongful Arrest, Detention, and Malicious Prosecution Claims.
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the threshold of reasonable prospects of success.
- 02
Whether there are compelling reasons for another court to reconsider the dismissal of claims for wrongful arrest, detention, and malicious prosecution.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants contend that the court erred in dismissing their claims for wrongful arrest, detention, and malicious prosecution. They argue that there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion and that the interests of justice require the appeal to be heard.
- Respondent
- The respondents oppose the application, submitting that the applicants have not demonstrated any reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that the judgment was correctly decided on the facts and law.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 17(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013
Leave to appeal may only be granted where the judge believes the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success or there is another compelling reason for the appeal to be heard, such as conflicting judgments.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that, having considered all the issues raised in the application for leave to appeal, there is a reasonable prospect that another court may reach a different conclusion regarding the dismissal of the applicants' claims for wrongful arrest, detention, and malicious prosecution. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is granted to the full bench of the Division.
Obiter and limits
- The court expressed appreciation for the submissions made by both counsels in their heads of argument and at the hearing of the application.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted to the full bench of the Division.
- The application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this Division against the judgment and order of 14 February 2024 is granted.
- Costs of the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.
Source and reliance status
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Judgment
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE
HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO: 26135/2017
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED:
DATE: 13 AUGUST 2024.
SIGNATURE:
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
JOHANNA SUSANNA VAN VUUREN N.O.
FIRST APPLICANT
JOHANNA
SUSANNA VAN VUUREN
SECOND APPLICANT
AND
THE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
FIRST RESPONDENT
THE
MINISTER OF POLICE
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
BOKAKO AJ
Delivered: This judgment was prepared and authored by the Judge whose name is reflected and is handed down electronically by circulation to Parties / their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on Case Lines. The date of the judgment is deemed to be 13 August 2024.
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an application for leave to appeal the judgment and order of this Court handed down on 14 February 2024. The court dismissed the Applicant's claims for wrongful arrest, detention, and malicious prosecution in that judgment. The applicant seeks to challenge that order before the SCA or a full bench. The respondents opposed the application.
2. It is a trite principle of our law that leave to appeal may only be given where the Judge or Judges concerned believe that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success or where there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter under consideration. (See section 17 (J)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013).
3. The grounds for the leave to appeal are succinctly stated in the notice of application for leave to appeal, and I do not intend to restate them in this judgment. Furthermore, . I would like to extend my gratitude and appreciation to both counsels for the submissions made in their heads of argument and at the hearing of this application.
4. I believe that I have considered all the issues raised in this application for leave to appeal in my judgment. I am therefore persuaded that another Court may come to a different conclusion in this case. Therefore, the application for leave to appeal is granted.
5. In the circumstances, I make the following order:
1. The application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this Division against the judgment and order of 14 February 2024 is granted.
2. Costs of the application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.
T
BOKAKO
Acting Judge of the High Court
Gauteng Local Division, Pretoria
APPEARANCES
DATE OF HEARING: 24 JULY 2024
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13 AUGUST 2024
COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT:
ADV BOUWER
COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:
ADV MOSOMA
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.