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 156
|
|
Stephanus and Another v Firstrand Bank Ltd t/a First National Bank (21862/10) [2010] ZAGPJHC 156 (11 October 2010)
IN THE
SOUTH
GAUTENG HIGH COURT
JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 21862/10
DATE:
2010-10-11
In the matter between
JAN GEORGE STEPHANUS & HELENA
SEYFFERT
..................
Plaintiff
A
nd
FIRSTRAND BANK LIMITED T/A FIRST NATIONAL
BANK
...
Defendant
J U D G M E N T
(Application for Leave to Appeal)
WILLIS
, J
:
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal
against the judgment which I gave in this matter on 11 October 2010.
Interestingly,
I gave judgment in three other cases at that same
time, but the other respondents in those cases have decided to abide
with the
decision of the Court and had not subjected me to an
application for leave to appeal.
[2] I am flattered and indeed encouraged that the
Supreme Court of appeal (‘SCA’) has seen fit to refer
approvingly
to this judgment elsewhere. It seems to have endorsed the
overall thrust of my judgment in this matter.
[3] On the other hand, the application for leave
to appeal covers some issues which were not pertinently dealt with by
the SCA in
its judgments, such as
Nedbank
Limited v The National Credit Regulator,
2011 (3) SA 581
(SCA) and
FirstRand
Bank v Collett
,
2011 (4) SA 508
(SCA).
If one makes mention of almost any section of the
National Credit
Act, No. 34 of 2005
, a cry goes out among lawyers,
quot
homines, tot sententiae
(there are as
many different opinions as there are men and women capable of holding
them)!
[4] I am also mindful of that fact that the SCA,
in a famous case, which shall not be mentioned here today, said that
when it comes
to novel points of law, judicial humility is especially
appropriate when considering applications for leave to appeal.
Mindful
of the appropriate humility that is appropriate for this
court and mindful, too, of the variety of different opinions when it
comes
to interpretations of the
National Credit Act it
seems to me
that there is indeed a reasonable aspect that another court would
come to a different conclusion from my own in this
matter.
[5] There was no serious disagreement that, if
leave to appeal were to be granted, the appropriate forum to hear the
appeal would
be the SCA. This seems to me to be obvious, in view of
the complexity of the matter, and the issues of policy that will need
to
be considered, that the appeal should be heard by the SCA.
[6] The following order is made:
Leave to appeal is granted against my judgment
in case number 21862/2010, that is that matter of
Seyffert
v FirstRand Bank Limited
.
The appeal is directed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The costs and the application for leave to appeal, are costs of the
appeal.
---oOo---