Case Law[2022] ZAGPJHC 963South Africa
Branco and Another v Branco and Others; Branco and Another v Crouse and Another (018293/2022; 048805/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 963 (5 December 2022)
High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)
5 December 2022
Headnotes
in contempt of the order granted on the 31st of August 2022 and other ancillary orders. In the second application the applicants sought an interim order interdicting the respondents
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2022
>>
[2022] ZAGPJHC 963
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Branco and Another v Branco and Others; Branco and Another v Crouse and Another (018293/2022; 048805/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 963 (5 December 2022)
Branco and Another v Branco and Others; Branco and Another v Crouse and Another (018293/2022; 048805/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 963 (5 December 2022)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2022_963.html
sino date 5 December 2022
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO: 018293/2022
REPORTABLE:
NO
OF
INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
REVISED.
05/12/2022
In
the matter between:
SORAIA
MARIA PESTANA BRANCO
MAIN FIRST APPLICANT
SONIA
MARISSA PESTANA BRANCO AUGUSTO
SECOND APPLICANT
And
CARLA
CRISTINA PESTANA BRANCO
FIRST RESPONDENT
CARLA
CRISTINA PESTANA BRANCO N.O.
SECOND RESPONENT
ANDRIES
VAN JAARSEVELD N.O.
THIRD RESPONDENT
CELINA
DE JUSUS BRANCO AUGUSO N.O
FOURTH RESPONDENT
THE
MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
FREE
STATE DIVISION
FIFTH RESPONDENT
JORGE
MANUEL PESTANA BRANCO
AUGUSTO
SIXTH RESPONDENT
QUILOMBO
(PTY)
LTD
SEVENTH RESPONDENT
AND
CASE
NO: 048805/2022
SORAIA
MARIA PESTANA BRANCO
MAIN FIRST APPLICANT
SONIA
MARISSA PESTANA BRANCO AUGUSTO
SECOND APPLICANT
And
MAUTITUS
CROUSE
FIRST RESPONDENT
TRISTAN
BRANCO
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Delivered:
This judgment and order was prepared and
authored by the Judge whose name is reflected and is handed down
electronically by circulation
to Parties / their legal
representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file
of this matter on Case Lines. The
date of the order is deemed to be
the 5
th
of
December 2022.
TWALA
J
[1]
There are two applications that served before this Court on urgent
basis. In the first
application the applicants sought an order that
the respondents be held in contempt of the order granted on the 31
st
of August 2022 and other ancillary orders. In the second application
the applicants sought an interim order interdicting the respondents
from conducting the business of the Diplomat Hotel and other
ancillary relief.
[2]
These two applications were not properly uploaded on caselines and
court on line platforms
for hearing on the 29
th
of
November 2022 – hence the matter was rolled over for hearing to
the 30
th
of November 2022 to enable the Court to access
the documents on these platforms. Furthermore, it was urged by
counsel for the applicants
that these two applications be heard
together for they are intertwined and are based on the same facts.
The issues of urgency were
not determined on the first day for the
Court did not have access to the papers in this case.
[3]
Having heard both counsel and
having reflected on the case after having reserved the judgment,
it
became apparent that both applications do not comply with the rules
and practice manual of the Court. The contempt of Court
application
was initiated and enrolled in the urgent Court on the 12
th
of October 2022 but was removed from the roll since the applicants
chose to await the outcome of another application. The judgment
in
that application was delivered on the 25
th
of October 2022
and that judgment prompted the applicants to bring an application
seeking to amend the prayers of its notice of
motion which
application is opposed by the respondents and is yet to be
determined.
[4]
With regard to the second application for the interim interdict, the
respondents have
been operating and conducting the business of the
Diplomat Hotel since the 1
st
of September 2022. It is
disingenuous of the applicants to now approach the Court on urgent
basis when they knew for more than
two months about the conduct of
the respondents. The unavoidable conclusion is that the applications
do not comply with the rules
and practice manual of this Court. Put
in another way, these application falls to be struck from the roll
for lack of urgency.
[5]
In the circumstances, I make the following order:
1.
Both applications in the above case numbers are struck off the roll
for lack of urgency;
2.
The applicants are to pay the costs of the application including the
costs for the day of
the 29
th
of November 2022.
TWALA
M L
JUDGE
OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
LOCAL DIVISION
Date
of Hearing:
29 - 30 November
2022
Date
of Judgment:
5
th
December 2022
For
the Applicants:
Advocate N Strathern
Instructed
by:
Ulrich Roux & Associates
Tel: 011 455 4640
vanessa@rouxlegal.com
For
the Respondents:
Advocate McTuck
Instructed
by:
Remon Gerber Attorneys
Tel: 010 880 7294
remon@remonlaw.co.za
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Bruyns v Oosthuizen (A5938/2020) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1306 (8 December 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1306High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
Bruyns v Ridgeback Rentals (Pty) Ltd (2023/070025) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1183 (18 November 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 1183High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
Brondani v Brondani (2021/52977) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1157 (17 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1157High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
Bruni N.O and Another v Daytona Group Holding (Pty) Limited and Others (2021/59310) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1179 (18 November 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 1179High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar
Brough Capital (Pty) Ltd and Other v Lester Connock Commemoration Fund (Application for Leave to Appeal) (28646/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 999 (17 September 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 999High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)98% similar