Level 7 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Level 7 v Signature Restaurant Group (Pty) Ltd (051229/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1290 (29 November 2024)

48 Reportability
Arbitration Law

Brief Summary

Arbitration — Appeal against arbitral award — Applicant sought leave to appeal against a judgment concluding that an appeal to the High Court against an arbitrator’s award was not permissible under section 28 of the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 — Court found that while the applicant's prospects of success were fairly weak, the matter raised significant questions regarding the appealability of arbitral awards that warranted consideration by the Supreme Court of Appeal — Leave to appeal granted.

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
>>
2024
>>
[2024] ZAGPJHC 1290
|

|

Level 7 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Level 7 v Signature Restaurant Group (Pty) Ltd (051229/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1290 (29 November 2024)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION,
JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO
:  051229/2023
DATE
:
29-11-2024
(1)
REPORTABLE:  NO.
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:  NO.
(3)
REVISED.
29
November 2024
In
the matter between
LEVEL SEVEN
RESTAURANT (PTY) LTD
Applicant
and
SIGNATURE
RESTAURANT GROUP (PTY) LTD
Respondent
JUDGMENT
EX TEMPORE
: LEAVE
TO APPEAL
WILSON,
J
:  The applicant, Level
Seven, seeks leave to appeal against my judgment of 25 September
2024, in which I concluded that
it is not open to Level Seven to
appeal to the High Court against an arbitrator’s award by which
it is aggrieved.
The fundamental
basis for that decision was that
section 28
of the
Arbitration Act 42
of 1965
cannot be interpreted to permit such an appeal. Even if it
could, that is no reason to accept Level Seven’s argument that

such an interpretation would better promote the
spirit
purport and objects
of the Bill of
Rights.
Those conclusions
notwithstanding, I am persuaded that an appeal to the Supreme Court
of Appeal ought to be permitted.
I regard Level
Seven’s prospects of success on appeal as fairly weak. However,
given that the Supreme Court of Appeal has
not yet considered the
proper interpretation of
section 28
, I think that Level Seven’s
prospects are not so weak as to deprive me of a compelling reason to
send the matter on appeal.
It is, in my view, in the interests of
justice for the questions Level Seven raises about the appealability
of arbitral awards
to be resolved authoritatively by a court of
national jurisdisction.
For all those
reasons I make the following order-
1.
The application for leave to appeal is
granted.
2.
Leave is granted to the Supreme Court of
Appeal.
3.
The costs of the application for leave to
appeal are to be costs in the appeal
WILSON, J
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
29 November 2024