---

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

 

CASE NO: 25241/2021

REPORTABLE: NO

OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO

REVISED

25/10/2022

 

In the matter between:

 

SOHO NAILS WAXING BEAUTY (PTY) LIMITED                    Appellant

 

and

 

CGS SHOPFITTERS CC                                                           Respondent

 

Coram:                         Dlamini J

 

Date of hearing:         7 October 2022 – in a ‘virtual Hearing’ during a videoconference on Microsoft Teams digital platform.

 

Date of judgment:      25 October 2022

 

This judgment is deemed to have been delivered electronically by circulation to the parties’ representatives via email and shall be uploaded onto the caselines system.

 

JUDGMENT

LEAVE TO APPEAL

 

DLAMINI J

 

[1]        This an application for leave to appeal my judgment that I handed down on 8 September 2022.

 

[2]        The matter has a long history going back to a default judgment that was granted against the applicant on 14 November 2018.

 

[3]        It is common cause that when the matter came before me, the parties agreed that only the point in limine, wether this rescission application is incomptant, should be argued as this will have the effect of disposing the matter without dealing with the merits thereof.

 

[4]        The numb of the issue is whether Judge Senyatsi had already made a ruling that a further rescission application was incompetent.

 

[5]        It is trite that for an application for leave to appeal to be successful it is required of the parties seeking such leave to demonstrate that there are reasonable prospects that another Court would come to a different conclusion to that reached in the judgment that is sought to be taken on appeal.

 

[6]        The provisions of section 17 of the Supreme Court Act has now elevated the test to be applied for granting of leave to appeal. The use of the word “would” when considering the prospects of success in section 17 (1)(a)(i) , now imposes a more stringent and vigorous threshold.

 

[7]        I have read the heads of argument and heard and submissions of Counsel for both parties .

 

[8]        The honourable Senyatsi J found that another rescission application is incompetent. Futher that application to rescind the judgment is impermissible.

 

[9]        It is my considered view there is no ambiguity in Judge Senyatsi’s judgment . Unless it is reviewed, appealed and set aside, the judgment remains valid and should be followed.

 

For all the reasons stated above and in my judgment, I make the following order:

 

ORDER

 

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs

 

DLAMINI J

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

 

Date of hearing:                         7 October 2022

 

Delivered:                                  25 October 2022

 

For the Applicants:                     Adv AJ Venter

 

Email:                                         ajventer@law.co.za

 

Instructed by:                             Martins Weir-Smith                     

 

For theRespondent:                   SG Dos Santos

 

Email:                                         suzydsantos@gmail.com

 

Instructed by:                              James Bush        

 

---