Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd v National Commissioner, South African Police Service and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-046691) [2024] ZAGPPHC 452 (17 May 2024)

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 >> 2024 >> [2024] ZAGPPHC 452 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd v National Commissioner, South African Police Service and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-046691) [2024] ZAGPPHC 452 (17 May 2024) Beyond Forensics (Pty) Ltd v National Commissioner, South African Police Service and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2023-046691) [2024] ZAGPPHC 452 (17 May 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2024_452.html sino date 17 May 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case Number:  2023-046691 (1) REPORTABLE:   NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:   NO. (3) REVISED. DATE: 2024-05-17 SIGNATURE In the matter between: BEYOND FORENSICS (PTY) LTD Applicant and THE NATIONAL COMMISSIONER, SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE First Respondent THE DEPUTY NATIONAL COMMISSIONER OF SUPPORT SERVICES OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Second Respondent THE ACTING SECTION HEAD OF PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Third Respondent THE BID EVALUATION COMMITTEE OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Fourth Respondent THE BID ADJUDICATION COMMITTEE OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE Fifth Respondent ECM GROUP (PTY) LTD T/A ECM TECHNOLOGIES Sixth Respondent ACINO FORENSICS (PTY) LTD Seventh Respondent This judgment was prepared and authored by the Judge whose name is reflected and is handed down electronically by circulation to the Parties/their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines.  The date for handing down is deemed to be 17 May 2024. JUDGMENT:  APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL POTTERILL J [1]        I read the arguments before Tolmay J, the judgment, the applicant’s leave to appeal and the written heads submitted pertaining to the application for leave.  I have also listened to argument. [2]        In terms of s17 of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 leave to appeal may only be given where a Judge is of the opinion that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success, or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard. [3]        There is no compelling reason why the appeal should be heard;  I find no important points of law that warrant a consideration by a higher court. [4]        I am also unpersuaded that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. [5]        The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel if so employed.  Costs pertaining to work done after 1 April 2024 are awarded on scale C. S. POTTERILL JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT CASE NO: 2023/046691 HEARD ON: 16 May 2024 FOR THE APPLICANT: ADV. S. GROBLER SC AND ADV. P. VOLMINK INSTRUCTED BY: Dirk Kotze Attorneys c/o Alant, Gell & Martin Inc. FOR THE 1 ST TO 5 TH RESPONDENTS: ADV. Z.Z. MATEBESE SC AND ADV. V. PILLAY INSTRUCTED BY: The State Attorney FOR THE 6 TH RESPONDENT: ADV. C.M. RIP AND ADV. M. DU PLESSIS INSTRUCTED BY: Thompson Attorneys c/o Hack, Stupel & Ross Attorneys FOR THE 7 TH RESPONDENT: ADV. R. MOULTRIE SC AND ADV. M.Z. GWALA INSTRUCTED BY: Webber Wentzel DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17 May 2024 sino noindex make_database footer start