SKG Africa (Pty) Ltd v Special Investigating Unit and Others (2025-034050) [2025] ZAGPPHC 485 (9 May 2025)

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: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPPHC 485 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## SKG Africa (Pty) Ltd v Special Investigating Unit and Others (2025-034050) [2025] ZAGPPHC 485 (9 May 2025) SKG Africa (Pty) Ltd v Special Investigating Unit and Others (2025-034050) [2025] ZAGPPHC 485 (9 May 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2025_485.html sino date 9 May 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA CASE NO: 2025-034050 (1)      REPORTABLE: NO (2)      OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3)      REVISED. DATE 09/05/2025 SIGNATURE In the matter between: SKG AFRICA (PTY) LTD Applicant And SPECIAL INVESTIGATING UNIT First Respondent RYDEN INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (PTY) LTD Second Respondent BENAL PROPERTY INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD Third Respondent THE ROYAL PROPERTY TRUST Fourth Respondent SHULA DEVELOPERS (PTY) LTD Fifth Respondent JUDGMENT MBONGWE J: [1] On 26 March 2025 in the Urgent Court I heard an opposed application for interdictory relief. [2] At the conclusion of the hearing I gave an ex tempore judgment and ordered that the matter was not urgent and that it is removed from the roll. [3] A request by Counsel for the Applicant that an order be made directing the times for the Applicant to institute a review application in respect of which the interdict was sought be included in the removal order was erroneously entertained and an order, order 2, issued. [4] A further error, the costs order that was supposed to be in favour of the First Respondent was given in favour of the Applicant. [5] I have on 09 May 2025, pursuant to correspondence from the First Respondent’s attorneys, had a meeting with, inter alia , Counsel for the parties to explain the errors and advise that the order dated 28 March 2025 will be corrected and aligned with the conclusion reached on 26 March 2025 as follows: 1.1. Order 1 for the removal of the matter from the roll for lack of urgency remains. 1.2. Order 2 relating to review proceedings to be launched by the Applicant is deleted. 1.3. Order 3 is deleted and substituted with the following: “ 3. The Applicant is ordered to pay the costs of this application, which costs shall include the costs consequent upon employment of two counsel.” MPN MBONGWE JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Appearances: For the Applicant: Adv A Botha SC; Adv J Pretorius Instructed by: Sims Attorneys For the First Respondent: Adv S Khumalo; Adv NC Nhlapho Instructed by: Noko Maimela Attorneys Date of hearing: 25 & 26 March 2025 Date of Order: 28 March 2025 Date of Revised Judgment: 09 May 2025 sino noindex make_database footer start