Waco Africa (Pty) Ltd v Form Force (Pty) Ltd and Others (12178/2015) [2022] ZAGPPHC 734 (28 September 2022)

Waco Africa (Pty) Ltd v Form Force (Pty) Ltd and Others (12178/2015) [2022] ZAGPPHC 734 (28 September 2022)

The court found that although interlocutory orders are generally not appealable, there are exceptions where the discretion exercised by the court is capricious or based on a wrong principle. In this case, the applicant failed to demonstrate that the court's discretion was exercised improperly or capriciously. The applicant did not show reasonable prospects of success for the appeal. The point in limine raised by the respondent regarding non-appealability was dismissed, but ultimately, the application for leave to appeal was refused as it lacked merit.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 734
Parties
Applicant: Waco Africa (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Form Force (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Ismail Sadek; Respondent: Hassan Suleman
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 September 2022
Case Number
12178/2015
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Interlocutory Orders Under Rule 35(7) and Rule 21.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Phahlamohlaka
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Orders, Leave to Appeal, Discovery of Documents, Rule 35, Rule 21
Civil Procedure Interlocutory Orders Leave to Appeal Discovery of Documents Rule 35 Rule 21

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waco Africa (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Form Force (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Ismail Sadek

Respondent

Hassan Suleman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Interlocutory Orders Under Rule 35(7) and Rule 21.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interlocutory orders made by the court are appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success for leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the court exercised its discretion capriciously or on a wrong principle.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although interlocutory orders are generally not appealable, there are exceptions where the discretion exercised by the court is capricious or based on a wrong principle. In this case, the applicant failed to demonstrate that the court's discretion was exercised improperly or capriciously. The applicant did not show reasonable prospects of success for the appeal. The point in limine raised by the respondent regarding non-appealability was dismissed, but ultimately, the application for leave to appeal was refused as it lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.