Vukani Gaming Gauteng (Pty) Ltd and Others v KKK Properties CC and Others (87975/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 482 (21 June 2016)
The court found that the applicants, as licensed gambling operators, had established a clear right to protection from unlawful competition and harm to their business interests. The evidence, including investigator reports and video stills, demonstrated that unlicensed gambling activities were taking place at the premises owned by the first respondent and operated by the second respondent. The respondents failed to provide credible evidence to refute the applicants' claims, and their arguments regarding hearsay and lack of control over customer activities were unpersuasive. The court held that the conduct of the respondents was unlawful, in breach of both national and provincial gambling...
- Citation
- [2016] ZAGPPHC 482
- Parties
- Applicant: Vukani Gaming Gauteng (PTY) LTD; Applicant: Die Watergat Kroeg CC; Applicant: 2 Greeks and a Boertjie Investments CC; Respondent: KKK Properties CC; Respondent: Royal Internet Café; Respondent: Gauteng Gambling Board
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 21 June 2016
- Case Number
- 87975/2015
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application After Initial Urgent Proceedings Struck Off for Lack of Urgency; Heard on Merits
- Outcome
- Final interdict granted in favour of the applicants; costs awarded against the second respondent.
- Judges
- TS Madima
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Gambling, Licensing Requirements, Interdict, Public Policy, Route Operator Licence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Vukani Gaming Gauteng (PTY) LTD
Applicant
Die Watergat Kroeg CC
Applicant
2 Greeks and a Boertjie Investments CC
Applicant
KKK Properties CC
Respondent
Royal Internet Café
Respondent
Gauteng Gambling Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application After Initial Urgent Proceedings Struck Off for Lack of Urgency; Heard on Merits
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the first respondent permitted unlawful gambling activities on its premises.
- 2 Whether the second respondent conducted or allowed unlawful gambling activities without a licence.
- 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to a final interdict restraining the respondents from unlawful gambling activities.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants, as licensed gambling operators, had established a clear right to protection from unlawful competition and harm to their business interests. The evidence, including investigator reports and video stills, demonstrated that unlicensed gambling activities were taking place at the premises owned by the first respondent and operated by the second respondent. The respondents failed to provide credible evidence to refute the applicants' claims, and their arguments regarding hearsay and lack of control over customer activities were unpersuasive. The court held that the conduct of the respondents was unlawful, in breach of both national and provincial gambling...
Court Disposition
Final interdict granted in favour of the applicants; costs awarded against the second respondent.
Orders
- The first respondent is interdicted and restrained from permitting the use of its premises at The Northdale Shopping Centre, 204 Grafenheim Street, Nina Park, Akasia for restricted and unlawful gambling activities as prohibited by the National Gambling Act 7 of 2004 and the Gauteng Gambling Act 4 of 1995.
- The second respondent and all persons occupying the premises by, through or on behalf of the second respondent are interdicted and restrained from conducting any restricted or unlawful gambling activity and engaging in any conduct connected with unlawful gambling activity prohibited by the National Gambling Act 7 of...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment