Weaving v Reck and Others (11579/06) [2010] ZAWCHC 381 (23 April 2010)

Weaving v Reck and Others (11579/06) [2010] ZAWCHC 381 (23 April 2010)

The court held that it was bound by the full bench decision in Menzies Birse & Chiddv v Hall, which established that a decision made by a judge in chambers under Rule 48 is not appealable unless a statutory provision expressly allows it. The court found no basis to distinguish the present case from Menzies, as the relevant rules are for all practical purposes identical. The court further held that Section 21A of the Supreme Court Act requires extraordinary circumstances for leave to appeal on a costs issue, which were not present in this case. The invitation to follow Vaaltvn v Goss & Another was declined, as the present matter concerned the interpretation of a specific court order...

Citation
[2010] ZAWCHC 381
Parties
Plaintiff: Kevin Wayne Weaving; Defendant: Richard Anthony Marcus Reck & 3 Others
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 April 2010
Case Number
11579/06
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against a Decision Made in Chambers on Review of Taxing Master's Ruling.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal is struck from the roll with costs.
Judges
Fourie R
Legal Topics
Review of Taxation, Leave to Appeal, Costs Only Appeal, Rule 48, Appealability of Chambers Decision
Civil Procedure Review of Taxation Leave to Appeal Costs Only Appeal Rule 48 Appealability of Chambers Decision

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Wayne Weaving

Plaintiff

Richard Anthony Marcus Reck & 3 Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against a Decision Made in Chambers on Review of Taxing Master's Ruling.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is a decision made by a judge in chambers under Rule 48 on review of the Taxing Master's ruling appealable?
  2. 2 Has the plaintiff demonstrated extraordinary circumstances justifying leave to appeal on a costs issue?
  3. 3 Does the pending main action affect the appropriateness of granting leave to appeal?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it was bound by the full bench decision in Menzies Birse & Chiddv v Hall, which established that a decision made by a judge in chambers under Rule 48 is not appealable unless a statutory provision expressly allows it. The court found no basis to distinguish the present case from Menzies, as the relevant rules are for all practical purposes identical. The court further held that Section 21A of the Supreme Court Act requires extraordinary circumstances for leave to appeal on a costs issue, which were not present in this case. The invitation to follow Vaaltvn v Goss & Another was declined, as the present matter concerned the interpretation of a specific court order...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal is struck from the roll with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is struck from the roll with costs.