Waenhuiskrans Ratepayers Association and Another v Verreweide (Edms) Ontwikkeling (Edms) Beperk and Others (1926/2008) [2010] ZAWCHC 26 (2 February 2010)
The court found that, upon reconsideration of all arguments presented, including those not expressly addressed in the original judgment, there remained no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The judge confirmed that all arguments were considered, even if not individually...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] ZAWCHC 26
- Parties
- Applicant: Waenhuiskrans Ratepayers Association; Applicant: Waenhuiskrans Action Group; Respondent: Verreweide (Edms) Ontwikkeling (Edms) Beperk; Respondent: Cape Agulhas Munisipaliteit; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 1926/2008
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal is refused.
- Judges
- De Swardt, AJ
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Waenhuiskrans Ratepayers Association
Applicant
Waenhuiskrans Action Group
Applicant
Verreweide (Edms) Ontwikkeling (Edms) Beperk
Respondent
Cape Agulhas Munisipaliteit
Respondent
Registrar of Deeds
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal After Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion on appeal.
- 2 Whether all arguments presented during the hearing were considered in the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, upon reconsideration of all arguments presented, including those not expressly addressed in the original judgment, there remained no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The judge confirmed that all arguments were considered, even if not individually discussed in the judgment, and concluded that the requirements for leave to appeal were not met.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal is refused.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT. CAPE TOWN)
CASE NUMBER: 1926/2008
DATE: 2 FEBRUARY 2010
In the matter between:
WAENHUISKRANS RATEPAYERS
ASSOCIATION 1st APPLICANT
WAENHUISKRANS ACTION GROUP 2nd APPLICANT
and
VERREWEIDE (EDMS) ONTWIKKELING
(EDMS) BEPERK 1st RESPONDENT
CAPE AGULHAS MUNISIPALITEIT 2nd RESPONDENT
REGISTRAR OF DEEDS 3rd RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Application for Leave to Appeal
DE SWARDT, AJ:
In this matter I have given careful consideration to the arguments that were presented to me in support of the application for leave to appeal. In the course of argument, it was submitted that certain arguments which had been addressed to me during the course of the hearing, were not referred to in the judgment that was subsequently handed down. The fact that not each and every one of the arguments advanced to me were dealt with in the judgment, does not mean that those matters were not considered.
On a conspectus of the arguments presented to me in support of the application for leave to appeal, it appears to me that the essence of the arguments remained the same as they were during the course of the initial hearing before me. On a consideration of the arguments
afresh, it still does not appear to me that there is a reasonable prospect that another Court will come to conclusions different to those that I have arrived at in the judgment that I have handed down.
Consequently, leave to appeal is refused.
DE SWARDT, AJ