Vuselela Security SPV (RF) v Lizoxola Properties (069952/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1129 (6 October 2023)

Vuselela Security SPV (RF) v Lizoxola Properties (069952/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1129 (6 October 2023)

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the underlying order was granted by consent, and it is well-established that appeals do not lie against consent orders. The only non-consensual aspect was the costs order, which was made in accordance with a contractual provision for attorney-and-client costs. No facts were presented to justify a departure from the contractual costs scale, and the applicant failed to advance any grounds attacking the costs order. Therefore, there was no prospect of success on appeal, and the application was dismissed with costs on the attorney-and-client scale.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1129
Parties
Applicant: Vuselela Security SPV (RF); Respondent: Lizoxola Properties
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 October 2023
Case Number
069952/2023
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Urgent Court Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on the attorney-and-client scale.
Judges
Wilson
Legal Topics
Consent Order, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award, Attorney and Client Scale
Civil Procedure Consent Order Leave to Appeal Costs Award Attorney and Client Scale

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vuselela Security SPV (RF)

Applicant

Lizoxola Properties

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Urgent Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal can be granted against an order made by consent.
  2. 2 Whether the costs order on the attorney-and-client scale is appealable.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the underlying order was granted by consent, and it is well-established that appeals do not lie against consent orders. The only non-consensual aspect was the costs order, which was made in accordance with a contractual provision for attorney-and-client costs. No facts were presented to justify a departure from the contractual costs scale, and the applicant failed to advance any grounds attacking the costs order. Therefore, there was no prospect of success on appeal, and the application was dismissed with costs on the attorney-and-client scale.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on the attorney-and-client scale.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant for leave to appeal is to pay the costs of the application on the scale as between attorney and client.