Victor and Another v Wonderhoek Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (5049/2014) [2022] ZAFSHC 153 (10 June 2022)

Victor and Another v Wonderhoek Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (5049/2014) [2022] ZAFSHC 153 (10 June 2022)

The court found that the order issued by Van Zyl J on 4 August 2021 was not ambiguous nor did it contain a patent error or omission. The transcript and judgment demonstrated that interim relief pending a return date was specifically requested and granted, in line with the applicants' submissions and the procedural context. The order reflected the true intention of the presiding judge and was consistent with the relief sought at the time. There was no basis for varying the order under Rule 42(1)(b). The conduct of Wonderhoek's legal representatives did not warrant a costs order de bonis propriis, as their actions were in compliance with the interim order and did not amount to...

Citation
[2022] ZAFSHC 153
Parties
Applicant: Vaugh Victor; Applicant: Maria Magrietha Catharina Victor; Respondent: Wonderhoek Farms (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Donovan Majiedt N.O.; Respondent: Karin Fortein N.O.; Respondent: Jerry Sekele Koko N.O.; Respondent: Firstrand Bank Limited; Respondent: The Master of the High Court, Bloemfontein; Respondent: Maryna Symes N.O.; Respondent: Anton Ottly Noordman N.O.
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2022
Case Number
5049/2014
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Vary Previous Order Under Rule 42(1)(b)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Van Rhyn
Legal Topics
Rule 42 Variation, Urgent Interdict, Patent Error or Omission, Rule Nisi, Costs De Bonis Propriis
Civil Procedure Rule 42 Variation Urgent Interdict Patent Error or Omission Rule Nisi Costs De Bonis Propriis

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vaugh Victor

Applicant

Maria Magrietha Catharina Victor

Applicant

Wonderhoek Farms (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Donovan Majiedt N.O.

Respondent

Karin Fortein N.O.

Respondent

Jerry Sekele Koko N.O.

Respondent

Firstrand Bank Limited

Respondent

The Master of the High Court, Bloemfontein

Respondent

Maryna Symes N.O.

Respondent

Anton Ottly Noordman N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Vary Previous Order Under Rule 42(1)(b)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granted on 4 August 2021 by Van Zyl J contains a patent error or ambiguity justifying variation under Rule 42(1)(b).
  2. 2 Whether the relief granted under Part A of the notice of motion was final or interim in nature.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the first respondent's legal representatives warrants a costs order de bonis propriis.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the order issued by Van Zyl J on 4 August 2021 was not ambiguous nor did it contain a patent error or omission. The transcript and judgment demonstrated that interim relief pending a return date was specifically requested and granted, in line with the applicants' submissions and the procedural context. The order reflected the true intention of the presiding judge and was consistent with the relief sought at the time. There was no basis for varying the order under Rule 42(1)(b). The conduct of Wonderhoek's legal representatives did not warrant a costs order de bonis propriis, as their actions were in compliance with the interim order and did not amount to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to vary the order of 4 August 2021 under Rule 42(1)(b) is dismissed with costs.