Sejake v Ratlou Local Municipality and Another (UM161/2023) [2024] ZANWHC 12; - (18 January 2024)
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
UM161/2023
Judge
J.T. Djaje
The High Court held that an application for leave to appeal suspended execution of an earlier judgment under section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act, and granted urgent relief and punitive costs.
A and O Imports and Exports (Pty) Limited t/a Moreschi and Others v Liberty Group Limited and Others (4380/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1456 (13 December 2023)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
4380/2021
Judge
T Van Der Walt
The High Court dismissed an urgent bid to stop attachment of bank funds, finding the appeal had lapsed and section 18 of the Superior Courts Act did not apply.
Chairperson of the Western Cape Gambling and Racing Board and Others v Goldrush Group Management (Pty) Ltd and Another (A660/2022) [2022] ZAWCHC 223 (3 November 2022)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A660/2022
Judges
Goliath, Baartman, Binns-Ward
The court held that Goldrush failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that it would suffer irreparable harm if the order was not made immediately operative. The alleged harm was speculative, based on the assumption that Goldrush would obtain a third route operator licence and that LPM opportunities would be lost to existing licensees. The court found no evidence supporting this scenario. Goldrush's abandonment of interim interdictory relief further undermined its claim of urgency and harm. The court also noted that Goldrush had delayed unduly in instituting review proceedings and lacke…
Mawonga v Walter Sisulu Local Municipality and Another (CA58/2019) [2019] ZAECGHC 60; [2019] 8 BLLR 852 (ECG) (21 May 2019)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
CA58/2019
Judges
Griffiths, Smith, Stretch
The court held that exceptional circumstances existed, as the appointment of a permanent municipal manager was necessary for effective municipal service delivery and the alternative of appointing an acting manager was legally and practically limited. The harm alleged by the appellant was not irreparable, as any financial loss could be remedied by back pay if he succeeded on appeal. The risk of having two municipal managers was disruptive and outweighed the appellant's interests. The requirements of section 18 of the Superior Courts Act were correctly applied by the court a quo, and the appeal…
