South Africa Case Law

Praia Roche 122 Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Land and Agricultural Bank of South Africa (Leave to Appeal) (658/2022)

Praia Roche 122 Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Land and Agricultural Bank of South Africa (Leave to Appeal) (658/2022) [2025] ZANCHC 65 (20 June 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

658/2022

Judge

Mamosebo

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the inordinate delay of 17 months in filing the application for leave to appeal. The explanation offered was vague, lacked specific dates and details, and did not cover the entire period of delay. The applicants attempted to raise new grounds not canvassed in the main proceedings, which is impermissible in motion proceedings. The court held that the applicants' conduct was dilatory and aimed at frustrating the execution process. There were no prospects of success or compelling reasons to grant leave to…

Source excerpt

• Condonation For Late Filing
• Leave To Appeal
• Special Executability
• Rule 49
• Rule 27
• Rule 46

Sibanye Still Water N.O and Others v Xinshe (M98/2022)

Sibanye Still Water N.O and Others v Xinshe (M98/2022) [2025] ZANWHC 102 (17 June 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M98/2022

Judge

T Masike

The High Court held that a request for written reasons was filed late under Rule 49(1)(c) and could not be entertained without consent or condonation.

• Security For Costs
• Late Filing
• Condonation
• Uniform Rules Of Court
• Rule 49
• Rule 27

Buffelsdrift Wild and Nature Reserve (Pty) Ltd v Magalies Water Board (44776/2021)

Buffelsdrift Wild and Nature Reserve (Pty) Ltd v Magalies Water Board (44776/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1185 (19 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

44776/2021

Judge

Meaden

The High Court refused condonation for a late leave to appeal application, finding the delay unsatisfactorily explained and the proposed appeal fatally defective.

• Condonation
• Leave To Appeal
• Rule 49
• Rule 27
• Interlocutory Orders
• Leave-to-appeal

Public Investment Corporation SOC Ltd and Another v Trencon Construction (Pty) Ltd and Another (49930/20)

Public Investment Corporation SOC Ltd and Another v Trencon Construction (Pty) Ltd and Another (49930/20) [2022] ZAGPPHC 226 (4 April 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

49930/20

Judge

Neukircher

The court refused Trencon’s late condonation application for a cross-appeal, but granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal for the GEPF and PIC.

• Leave To Appeal
• Condonation
• Rule 49
• Rule 42
• Prospects Of Success
• Leave-to-appeal

Orion Real Estate Limited v Zephan Properties Proprietary Limited (09441/2019)

Orion Real Estate Limited v Zephan Properties Proprietary Limited (09441/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 185 (18 June 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

09441/2019

Judge

B Wanless

The High Court granted leave to appeal, dismissed a timeliness objection, and varied a costs order that wrongly included senior counsel costs.

• Leave To Appeal
• Condonation
• Costs Order
• Rule 49
• Rule 42
• Leave-to-appeal

Ngobese v Coetzee (1401-2017)

Ngobese v Coetzee (1401-2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 877 (16 March 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

1401-2017

Judge

Sardiwalla

The High Court refused leave to appeal because the notice of appeal did not clearly set out the grounds and the respondent was not properly informed.

• Leave To Appeal
• Rule 49
• Locus Standi
• Administration Of Estates Act
• Leave-to-appeal
• Rule-49

Federation For Sustainable Environment and Another v Minister of Water Affairs and Others (35672/12)

Federation For Sustainable Environment and Another v Minister of Water Affairs and Others (35672/12) [2014] ZAGPPHC 428 (9 June 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

35672/12

Judge

N.M. Mavundla

High Court dismissed a late application for condonation and leave to cross-appeal over water-supply relief, finding no good cause and no prospects of success.

• Condonation
• Leave To Cross Appeal
• Rule 49
• Right Of Access To Water
• Separation Of Powers
• Leave-to-cross-appeal

Kloof Investment 2004 CC v Garry Isaacs t/a Build-O-Rama Builders Merchants (23305/2010)

Kloof Investment 2004 CC v Garry Isaacs t/a Build-O-Rama Builders Merchants (23305/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 552 (12 November 2010)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

23305/2010

Judge

J I CLOETE

The High Court held that a late request for reasons was out of time and that the urgency ruling was a procedural, non-appealable decision.

• Urgency
• Rule 49
• Inherent Jurisdiction
• Appealability Of Procedural Orders
• Section 173 Constitution
• Urgent-applications