Republic of South Africa 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA 
(WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN)

CASE No: 7953/2004
In the application for leave to appeal between:

and

		JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL 
	DELIVERED ON 22 FEBRUARY 2011

MOOSA, J:

[1 ] In this matter second and third defendants have applied for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment handed down by me on 4 November 2010. The said defendants base their application on a number of grounds covering all the elements of plaintiffs delictual claim, namely, unlawfulness, fault in the form of negligence, causation, harm and quantum.

[3] The plaintiffs counsel agreed that another court could come to a different conclusion with regard to the extension of delictual liability to the facts of this case. However, he submitted that I should limit the grounds of appeal to certain particular grounds where there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal.

[4] Counsel for the defendants on the other hand, contends that another court could reach another decision as to every aspect of the matter which was decided on. He furthermore submitted that considering the importance of the matter and its potential of extending liability for negligence arising from incidents on the school premises, it would not be fair and properto limit the grounds of appeal as contended for by the plaintiffs counsel.

[5]      The powers of appeal courts to consider grounds of appeal are succinctly set out in

Douglas v Douglas [1996] 2 All SA 1 (A) at 8i-9c as follows:

[6] In view of the nature and importance of this matter and the fact that the matter covers a wide range of legal and factual issues. I am of the view that the grounds of appeal should not be limited. The defendants should be given the right to ventilate on appeal, all the grounds impacting on the various issues.

[7] After giving careful consideration to the matter, I conclude that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal in respect of all the grounds and, in the circumstances, the defendants should be granted leave to appeal without any limitation.

[9] In the premises, the defendants are granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole of the judgment, handed down on 4 November 2010. Costs shall stand over for later determination.