South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2018 >> [2018] ZAGPPHC 269

| Noteup | LawCite

Meisel N.O. and Others v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (23733/12) [2018] ZAGPPHC 269 (19 April 2018)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG DIVISION PRETORIA

CASE NO: 23733/12

DATE: 19/04/2018

In the matter between:

MELITA MEISEL N.O.                                                                                       1st Applicant

LYDIA MOROESI SIHLANGU N.O.                                                                2nd Applicant

MANDLA JONATHAN SHUMBA                                                                     3rd Applicant

DESMOND KHALID GOLDING                                                                        4th Applicant

LINDIWE MICHELLE MASEKO                                                                       5th Applicant

KENELIWE LYDIA SEBEGO                                                                            6th Applicant

JUDITH SUSAN BORNMAN                                                                            7th Applicant

GEZINA DOROTHEA VAN ROOYEN                                                              8th Applicant

NGWANE ROUX SHABANGU                                                                         9th Applicant

ANTON JOHANNES DU PLESSIS                                                                 10th Applicant

VAN ROOYEN N.O.                                                                                        11th Applicant

And

LAND & AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SANK

OF SOUTH AFRICA                                                                                          Respondent

(In  the application for leave to appeal)

JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

AC BASSON, J

[1] This is an application for leave to appeal against my judgment dated 6 October

2017.

[2] The applicants rely on various grounds for leave to appeal. I do not intend repeating those grounds and I do not intend repeating my findings on each of these grounds. Suffice to point out that I have taken time to consider the submissions advanced on behalf of all the parties before coming to a conclusion. I have further also considered these submissions against my Judgment and the case law.

[3] In deciding whether to grant leave to appeal, this court has to take into account the provisions of section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013. 1he legal position now is that leave to appeal may only be granted where the court is of the opinion that the appeal would have reasonable prospects of success in respect of its findings. I am not persuaded that the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal and the application therefore falls to be dismissed.

[4] Although the issue of costs falls within the discretlo11 of a court and normally no appeal lies against such orders, I am likewise also not persuaded that the applicants have reasonable prospects of success.

Order

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

________________________

AC BASSON

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

Appearances:


For the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th applicants:              Adv Snyman

Instructed by:                                                     Dibakwane  Attorneys   c/o Mou Makoe Attorneys


For the 4th and 8th  applicants:                            Adv de Seer

Instructed by:                                                      Nel & Richter Incorporated Attorneys

For the 9th applicant:                                            Adv Basson

Instructed by:                                                       Ettienne Naude Attorneys

 

For the respondent:                                             Adv V Soni SC and Adv PG Seleka SC

Instructed by:                                                       Mkhabela Huntley Attorneys lnc.