Hamsa Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Sigodi Marah Martin Management Support (Pty) Ltd (32290/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1187 (22 September 2023)

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 >> 2023 >> [2023] ZAGPPHC 1187 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Hamsa Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Sigodi Marah Martin Management Support (Pty) Ltd (32290/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1187 (22 September 2023) Hamsa Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Sigodi Marah Martin Management Support (Pty) Ltd (32290/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1187 (22 September 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_1187.html sino date 22 September 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case No. 32290/2020 (1)  REPORTABLE: YES/NO (2)  OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:  YES/NO (3)  REVISED NO DATE: 22 September 2023 SIGNATURE: In the matter between: HAMSA CONSULTING ENGINEERS (PTY) LTD PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT And SIGODI MARAH MARTIN MANAGEMENT SUPPORT (PTY) LTD DEFENDANT/APPLICANT Coram: Millar J Heard on : 22 September 2023 Delivered: 22 September 2023 - This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' representatives by email, by being uploaded to the CaseLines system of the GD and by release to SAFLII. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be 10H00 on 22 September 2023. ORDER It is Ordered : [1]      The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs. JUDGMENT MILLAR  J [1] This is an application for leave to appeal by the defendant against a judgment and order handed down by me on 29 August 2023. [2] I have considered the reasons given by me for the judgment  as well as the grounds upon which the application for leave to appeal has been advanced. I have also considered the arguments advanced both in support and against the granting of leave. [3] I am not persuaded that another court would come to a different conclusion or that there is any other compelling reason why leave to appeal ought to be granted. [4] In the circumstances, I make the following order: [4.1]         The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs. A MILLAR JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA HEARD ON: 22 SEPTEMBER 2023 JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: 22 SEPTEMBER 2023 PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT COUNSEL: ADV. M Z SULEMAN INSTRUCTED BY: LARSON FALCONER HASSAN PARSEE INC REFERENCE: 22/H361/036 DEFENDANT/APPLICANT COUNSEL: ADV. A B ROSSOUW SC INSTRUCTED BY: CARI DU TOIT INC ATTORNEYS REFERENCE: C DU TOIT/SIG1/0064 sino noindex make_database footer start