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
>>
2014
>>
[2014] ZAGPPHC 15
|
|
Lanseria International Airport (Pty) Ltd v Imperial Bank (15860/2006) [2014] ZAGPPHC 15 (11 February 2014)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT)
Case number: 15860/2006
Date: 11 February 2014
In
the matter between:
LANSERIA
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (PTY) LTD
…………………………
.
Applicant
And
IMPERIAL
BANK
………………………………………………………………
Respondent
LEAVE TO APPEAL JUDGMENT
PRETORIUS J,
[1]
The application for leave
to appeal was launched on 29 January 2013. It is before this court on
6 February 2014, more than a year
after it had been launched.
[2]
Although the application
for leave to appeal was served and filed on 29 January 2013 it was
only brought to my attention during
April 2013. The registrar tried
to arrange a date for the hearing for leave to appeal, but due to the
fact that I was on long leave
during the second term and the
unavailability of counsel during the third and fourth terms no
suitable date to hear the appeal
could be found.
[3]
The respondent’s
attorney enquired during October 2013 from the registrar as to a
suitable date as the applicant had not pursued
the matter. It was
left to the attorneys to arrange a date and apparently according to
counsel, none of the four counsel were available
until today.
Therefore the long delay. I do find that it is not in the interest of
justice to have applications for leave to appeal
pending for more
than a year. There should have been more concerted effort by all
parties involved to deal with this matter expeditiously.
[4]
I have read the notice for
leave to appeal, considered all the arguments and heads of argument
by the applicant, as well as the
facts of the matter.
[5]
I am of the opinion that
another court might reach a different conclusion.
[6]
I
do not think that the basis for the application for leave to appeal,
that another court may apply the legal principles to the
facts
differently, warrants the attention of the Supreme Court of Appeal.
[7]
The following order is made:
1.
Leave
to appeal is granted to the Full Bench of the Gauteng Division of the
High Court;
2.
Costs
of this application to be costs in the appeal.
Judge
Pretorius
Case
number: 15860/2006
Heard
on : 29 November 2012
For the Applicant / Plaintiff : JP Voster SC
: AM Heystek
Instructed
by : Le Roux Vivier and Associates
For
the Respondent : EF Dippenaar SC
: AC
Botha
Instructed
by: Bezuidenhout van Zyl & Associates INC.
Date
of Judgment: 9 January 2013