Fisher and Others v Ramatibela and Others (2024-089598) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1087 (26 September 2025)

30 Reportability
Civil Procedure

Brief Summary

Joinder — Application for joinder — Applicants sought to intervene in a rescission application — Opposed by several respondents on grounds of late service — Court found that the joinder application was intrinsically linked to the rescission application and should be heard simultaneously — Application referred to unopposed motion court for hearing on 29 September 2025, with costs reserved.

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO.: 2024-089598




In the matter between
PUSO FISHER FIRST APPLICANT
REBECCA MATHE SECOND APPLICANT
MARY FISHER THIRD APPLICANT
and
MOSES RAMATIBELA FIRST RESPONDENT
MICHAEL MOTHIBE SECOND RESPONDENT
ROBBY SIKWANE THIRD RESPONDENT
STANLEY BODIBE FOURTH RESPONDENT
MOGODOPI MOREMI FIFTH RESPONDENT
MARIA RAKITLA SIXTH RESPONDENT
PIET RAKITLA SEVENTH RESEPONDENT

(1) REPORTABLE: NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED: NO

Date: 26 September 2025 E van der Schyff

2

2

JOEL SINDANE EIGHTH RESPONDENT
ELLEN MAKUBETSI MORIFI NINTH RESPONDENT
ELIZABETH SKOSANA TENTH RESPONDENT
THABISO MATOME ELEVENTH RESPONDENT
BOITUMELO MOHOLOENG MATHULOE TWELFTH RESPONDENT
KATLEGO MOGAPI THIRTEENTH RESPONDENT
MARTHA MOKOENA FOURTEENTH RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT
Van der Schyff J

[1] The applicants appeared in person, with the first applicant the spokesperson. The
applicants informed the court that they want to intervene in a rescission application
brought under the same case number that is enrolled for hearing on the unopposed
motion roll on 29 September 2025.

[2] The application was opposed by the first, second, third and fifth respondents . The
eleventh and thirteenth respondents appeared in person. They informed the court
that they were not served timeously with the application.

[3] The joinder application is intrinsically linked to the rescission application. Due to the
limited time frames within which the joinder application was brought and the fact that
the rescission application is enrolled for 29 September 2025, I am of the view that
both applications must be heard simultaneously. I am not inclined to make a final
order and the application is to be referred to be heard in the unopposed motion court
on 29 September 2025.


ORDER
In the result, the following order is granted:

3

3


1. The joinder application by the intervening parties is referred to be heard on
the unopposed motion roll of 29 September 2025. The parties must appear
before Van der Westhuizen J for directions.
2. Costs reserved.

_______ _____
E van der Schyff
Judge of the High Court

Delivered: This judgment is handed down electronically by uploading it to the electronic file of
this matter on CaseLines. In the event that there is a discrepancy between the date the judgment
is signed and the date it is uploaded to CaseLines, the date the judgment is uploaded to
CaseLines is deemed to be the date that the judgment is handed down.

The applicants: In person


For the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th respondents: Adv. C. Smit
Instructed by: Serfontein, Viljoen & Swart

The 11th and 14th respondents: In person

Date of the hearing: 26 September 2025
Date of judgment: 26 September 2025