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
>>
2009
>>
[2009] ZAGPPHC 198
|
|
Leopard's Lair Development Company (Pty) Ltd v V & V Consulting Engineers (Pty) Pty (21572/2007) [2009] ZAGPPHC 198 (3 June 2009)
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(NORTH
GAUTENG HIGH COURT)
Dates: 25 May 2009, 3 June 2009
Case no.: 21572/2007
In
the matter between:
LEOPARD’S
LAIR DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
(PTY) LTD Applicant
and
V
& V CONSULTING ENGINEERS (PTY) LTD Respondent
JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE
TO APPEAL BY APPLICANT
Van
Rooyen AJ
[1]
An application for leave to appeal was filed against my judgment in
favour of the Respondent in this matter.
[2]
The main argument put forward by Mr De Wet on behalf of the
applicant, was that I here were reasonable prospects that Applicant
would be able to show a bona fide defence in that there had never
been a contract and that correspondence which referred to the
R500
000 did not constitute such a contract. The contract which had to he
proved was the contract as pleaded, not promises to pay
later.
Secondly he argued that the claim was indivisible and that the Court
had not been justified in ordering that only a part
of the claim
should he referred to
trial.
[3]
I have considered the matter on the basis whether there are
reasonable prospects that another court might tome to a different
conclusion. My conclusion is that there are no such reasonable
prospects. The reasonable inference from the correspondence and
the
circumstances taken as a whole is that a contractual relationship
existed. The division of the matter is reasonable in the
light of the
acknowledgements and there is no reason why a trial court could not
be placed in a position to decide whether more
than the R500 000 is
owing. The core of the matter is that the Applicant was unable to
show that there is u bona fide defence as
to the R500 000. The amount
of R500 000 was acknowledged lime and again. Any argument that the
result of the trial could be that
less than R500 000 is owing is not
supported by a bona tide defence.
[4]
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
3
June 2009
JCW
van Rooyen
Acting
Judge of the High Court
For
the Applicant : UN De Wet instructed by Cilliers and Reynders
Attorneys c/o Potgieter.
For
the Respondent: WJ Roos instructed by Von Reiche Inc. Pretoria