REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA 
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO: 68285/13
DATE: 12 SEPTEMBER 2014
NOT REPORTABLE
NOT OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES
In the matter between:
WATERS FIREARM TRAINING..................................................................................FIRST APPLICANT
AND ASSESSMENT CENTRE CC t/a FIREARM
COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT AND TRAINING CENTRE
NTATE AVIATION AND SECURITY TRAINING CC.........................................SECOND APPLICANT
YE-SIZWE SECURITY SERVICES CC......................................................................THIRD APPLICANT
UNLIMITED BUSINESS UPLIFTMENT
TRADING UNITS (PTY) LIMITED.........................................................................FOURTH APPLICANT
and
THE NATIONAL COMMISSIONER OF THE........................................................FIRST RESPONDENT
SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER:
VISIBLE POLICING OF THE
SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICES.............................................................SECOND RESPONDENT
THE SAFETY AND SECURITY SECTOR EDUCATION AND TRAINING AUTHORITY
(“SASSETA”)...............................................................................................................THIRD RESPONDENT
THE QUALITY COUNCIL....................................................................................FOURTH RESPONDENT
FOR TRADE AND OCCUPATIONS (“QCTO”)
SOUTH AFRICAN PROFESSIONAL
FIREARMS TRAINERS COUNCIL (“SAPFTC”)...................................................FIFTH RESPONDENT

 JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
BASSON, J
Introduction
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal to the Full Court of this Division against a judgment of this Court dated 20 June 2014 in terms of which this Court dismissed the application that served before it with costs inclusive of reserved costs. The application for leave to appeal was opposed by the fourth and fifth respondents.
[2] The grounds for leave to appeal are set out in the application for leave to appeal. I do not intend for purposes of this brief judgment repeating the grounds for leave to appeal. I also do not intend to repeat the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicants as those submissions were in essence the same as those submitted before me at the hearing of the application.

[3] It is trite that a Court will grant leave to appeal in circumstances where there are reasonable prospects of success1. I have again considered the arguments presented to this Court in the application for leave to appeal. I have also considered my judgment and I am not persuaded that the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
[4] In the event I make the following order.
4.1 The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
AC BASSON
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
12 September 2014