Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Aruforse (2010/1189) [2010] ZAGPJHC 161 (2 February 2010)

60 Reportability
Immigration Law

Brief Summary

Immigration Law — Leave to appeal — Application for leave to appeal against judgment interpreting s 34(1) of the Immigration Act 13 of 2002 — Conflicting unreported decisions on the interpretation of the section — Court finds reasonable prospect of success on appeal and substantial importance to the litigants — Leave to appeal granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2010
>>
[2010] ZAGPJHC 161
|

|

Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Aruforse (2010/1189) [2010] ZAGPJHC 161 (2 February 2010)

SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH
COURT, JOHANNESBURG
Case No. 2010/1189
DATE:02/02/ 2010
In the matter between:
MINISTER
OF HOME AFFAIRS
First
Applicant
DIRECTOR-GENERAL,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS
Second
Applicant
and
KANYO
ARUFORSE
Respondent
JUDGMENT
MEYER, J
[1] This is an
application for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment and
order which I have handed down and made in
this matter on 25 January
2010.
[2] I have considered the
various grounds raised by the applicants in support of their
application for leave to appeal and the submissions
of counsel.
I need not deal with all the grounds and submissions herein other
than to mention that this matter
inter alia
raises the
interpretation of
s 34(1)
of the
Immigration Act 13 of 2002
on which
there are conflicting unreported decisions.  Another court may
reasonably differ with the construction which I have
placed on the
section.
[3] I am accordingly of
the view that there is a reasonable prospect of the appeal succeeding
and the case is undoubtedly of substantial
importance to the
litigants.  The appeal, in my view, requires the attention of
the Supreme Court of Appeal.
[4] In the result the
following order is made:
1.
The
first and second applicants herein are granted leave to appeal
against the whole of my judgment and order which was handed down
and
made in this matter on 25 January 2010.
2.It
is directed that the appeal be heard by the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The costs of this
application for leave to appeal are costs in the appeal.
P.A.MEYER
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
2 February 2010.