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
>>
2022
>>
[2022] ZAGPJHC 807
|
|
Dlodlo v Minster of Justice and Constitutional Development and Another (16306/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 807 (19 October 2022)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Case
no.: 16306/2022
REPORTABLE:
NO
OF
INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:
NO
REVISED.
19/10/2022
In
the matter between:
MOLEFE
RUFARO MTHULISI DLODLO
Applicant
And
THE
MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL
1
st
Respondent
DEVELOPMENT
THE
RULES BOARD FOR COURTS OF LAW
2
nd
Respondent
Coram:
Dlamini J
Date
of hearing:
18 October 2022 – Court 9B
Date
of delivery of Judgment:
19 October 2022
This
Judgment is deemed to have been delivered electronically by
circulation to the parties’ representatives via email and
shall
be uploaded onto the caselines system.
JUDGMENT
DLAMINI
J
[1]
This an application wherein the Applicant seeks a declaratory order
that the restriction
on Presiding Officers barring them from awarding
costs orders in favor of successful self-representing litigants
should be declared
unconstitutional.
[2]
The Applicant is Molefe Rufaro Dlodlo, an adult male with full legal
capacity who
describes himself as a self-representing litigant (SRL).
[3]
The first Respondent is the Minister of Justice and Constitutional
Development of
the Republic of South Africa (the Minister).
[4]
The Second Respondent is the Rules Board for the Courts of Law of the
Republic of
South Africa (the Rules Board).
RES JUDICATA
[5]
At the hearing of the application, the Respondent raised a point
in
limine
of res judicata
.
The parties agreed that this point
should be determined first as its finding will have the effect of
disposing of the application.
[6]
The Applicant brought a similar application seeking the same orders
under case number
2018/16715 wherein the First Respondent was cited
therein as Third Respondent. Having considered the application
Matojane J said
the following at [2]
"At the time the
Respondent brought the present application, there was a pending
application in terms of rule 30 (2) of the
Uniform Rules of Court by
the applicants to set aside respondents' rule 16A notice that was the
same as the one in the present
application and between the same
parties”
[7]
Matojane J went on to say at [5] …. “
the respondent
had simply added the Chief Justice of South Africa, the judge
president of the Johannesburg High Court, the Minister
of Justice and
Constitutional Development and the director-general, Ministry of
Justice and Constitutional development without
complying with the
rules on joinder of parties and seeking the requisite permission to
institute action against the Judge President
and the Chief Justice".
The learned Judge went on and dismissed the application with a
punitive cost order
[8]
The Appellant avers that Matojane J's judgment was/is inconvertibly
moot and of no
consequence – hence it was not appealed against.
The Applicant should have done exactly the opposite, he should have
appealed
this judgment instead he launches another impermissible
application to this Court. Until appealed or reviewed and set aside
Matojane
J’s judgment stand.
[9]
In my view, the first Respondent's point in limine of res judicata is
upheld.
In the circumstances
mentioned above, I make the following order
ORDER
1.
The application is
dismissed.
2.
The Applicant is
ordered to pay the costs of this application on the scale between
attorney and own client.
DLAMINI
J
JUDGE
OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Date of
hearing:
18 October 2022
Delivered:
19 October 2022
For the
Applicant:
Mr. Molefe Dlodlo
Email:
molefedlodlo@gmail.com
For the
Respondents:
Adv AM Adams
Email:
advadams@outlook.com