South Africa: High Courts - Gauteng Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: High Courts - Gauteng >> 1998 >> [1998] ZAGPHC 5

| Noteup | LawCite

Bouleigh 224 CC v Nedcor Bank Limited (15078/98) [1998] ZAGPHC 5 (31 August 1998)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format

NOT REPORTABLE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION)

JOHANNESBURG


CASE NUMBER: 15078/98

DATE: 1998-08-31


In the matter between


BOULEIGH224 CC..................................................................................................... Applicant
and

NEDCOR BANK LIMITED....................................................................................... Respondent


APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL: JUDGMENT


WILLIS. AJ: This is an application for leave to appeal. In my view in order for there to be reasonable prospects of success in an appeal in this matter Mr De Klerk would have to persuade me that on each of the difference bases which I found for the respondent in this particular application, there is a reasonable prospect that I was wrong. I have great difficulty in coming to the conclusion that with regard to each and every one of the bases that I previously found for the present respondent that another court would come to a different conclusion.

In my view therefore there are no reasonable prospects of success in an appeal in this matter. with regards to the costs it is true that another court may have made a different award from that which I originally made regarding the engagement of two counsel, nevertheless the question of costs is one which falls within the my discretion. Unless I misdirected myself in exercising that discretion another court would not interfere. I am satisfied I did not misdirect myself.

It is in any event trite that except in the most special of circumstances appeals should not be heard with regard to the question of costs only. For the same reasons that I awarded the cost of two counsel in the original application, -I am inclined to grant an order for costs in this particular application that includes the cost of two counsel. Consequently the following order is made: The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, which costs are to include the costs consequent upon the engagement of two counsel.