About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2015
>>
[2015] ZAGPPHC 556
|
|
Rasebotsa t/a Everon Filling Station v Engen Petrolem Limited (24051/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 556 (6 August 2015)
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
Case number: 24051/2014
Date: 6 August 2015
DELETE
WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE
(1)
REPORTABLE:
Y
ES
/NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES:
YES
/NO
(3)
REVISED
…
6/8/2015…..
….……………..….
DATE
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
MALAN
RONALD RASEBOTSA t/a EVERON FILLING STATION
(Identity Number:
……)
.................................................................................................
APPLICANT
And
ENGEN PETROLEUM LIMITED
(Registration Number: 1989/003754/06)
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
PRETO
R
IUS
J
,
2
[1] This is an
application for leave to appeal against the judgment of this court of
6 May 2015.08.05
[2]
I have considered all the reasons for the application for leave to
appeal and have studied the papers in the original application
once
more. I have dealt extensively in my judgment with all the arguments
and facts by both parties. I do not intend repeating
the facts and
findings as set out in my judgment, but confirm these findings in
relation to this application for leave to appeal.
3.1 The
contention by the applicant that the report dealing with the
measurement of the fuel, had not been placed before the
court as an
expert's report cannot be entertained. This was never raised during
the application and has only now been raised in
the application for
leave to appeal. In any event, it relates to the outstanding amount
for fuel, which is R338.15. The amount
in respect of rent is R583
591.71 and the amount in respect of the levy is R213 982.08. I have
once again considered the arguments,
the papers and my judgment
3.2
I
reiterate that there is no real factual dispute on the papers
and therefor I am still convinced that the matter should not be
referred
to trial or for oral evidence.
[3] I cannot find that another court
would reach another conclusion under these circumstances and I am of
the opinion that the application
will not succeed on appeal.
[4] I make the following order:
1.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed;
3
2.
The
applicant
is
ordered
to
pay
the
costs
of
the
application
for
leave
to appeal.
_____________
Judge C Pretorius
4
Case
number :
24051/2014
Application for leave to appeal heard
on : 5 August 2015
For the
Applicant :
Adv. G Janse van Vuuren
Instructed
by :
Ruan Vorster Attorneys
For the
Respondent
: Adv. Clive van der Spuy
Instructed
by :
Lanham-Love Attorneys
Date of
Judgment :
6 August 2015