South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal >> 2011 >> [2011] ZASCA 126

| Noteup | LawCite

Emergency Care Training Association v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (664/10) [2011] ZASCA 126 (9 September 2011)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format



THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA


JUDGMENT


Case No: 664/10


In the matter between:


EMERGENCY CARE TRAINING ASSOCIATION …....................................Appellant


and


HEALTH PROFESSIONS COUNCIL OF

SOUTH AFRICA …...........................................................................First Respondent

PROFESSIONAL BOARD FOR EMERGENCY CARE

PRACTITIONERS …...................................................................Second Respondent

CHAIRPERSON: PROFESSIONAL BOARD FOR

EMERGENCY CARE PRACTITIONERS …....................................Third Respondent


Neutral citation: Emergency Care Training Association v Health Professions

Council of South Africa (664/10) [2011] ZASCA 126 (9 September 2011).


Coram: CLOETE, SNYDERS, SHONGWE, SERITI and WALLIS JJA


Heard: 9 SEPTEMBER 2011


Delivered: 9 SEPTEMBER 2011


Summary:

_____________________________________________________________


ORDER

______________________________________________________________


On appeal from: North Gauteng High Court (Pretoria) (Kollapen J sitting as

court of first instance):


The appeal is dismissed. The appellant is ordered to pay the respondents' costs including the costs of two counsel.

______________________________________________________________


JUDGMENT

______________________________________________________________



CLOETE JA (SNYDERS, SHONGWE, SERITI and WALLIS JJA concurring):


[1] No decision was required by the court a quo as the undertakings given by some of the respondents in the answering affidavit rendered the relief sought unnecessary.


[2] A decision on the issues sought to be raised on appeal would have no practical effect or result.


[3] I would therefore exercise the discretion this court has in terms of s 21A of the Supreme Court Act, 59 of 1959, in favour of dismissing the appeal.


[4] The appeal is dismissed. The appellant is ordered to pay the respondents' costs including the costs of two counsel.




_______________

T D CLOETE

JUDGE OF APPEAL

APPEARANCES:

APPELLANTS: D S Fourie SC

Instructed by Hurter Spies Inc, Pretoria

Rossouw Attorneys, Bloemfontein


RESPONDENTS: M Chaskalson SC (with him Ms N J Jele)

Instructed by Gildenhuys Lessing Malatji Inc, Pretoria

Honey Attorneys, Bloemfontein