Singh v South African Reserve Bank (35964/20) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1211 (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 1211 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Singh v South African Reserve Bank (35964/20) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1211 (22 September 2023) Singh v South African Reserve Bank (35964/20) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1211 (22 September 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_1211.html sino date 22 September 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Case number: 35964/20 Date of hearing: 24 August 2023 Date delivered: 24 August 2023 Reasons: 22 September 2023 In the matter between: SURENDRA SINGH                                                           Applicant and SOUTH AFRICAN RESERVE BANK                              Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT SWANEPOEL J: [1]        On 24 August 2023 I heard an application for leave to appeal against a judgment of my sister Mngqibisa-Thusi J which she handed down on 20 February 2023. [2]        The notice of application for leave to appeal confined the grounds for appeal to essentially one proposition: That the respondent's decision to attach R 40 million belonging to applicant was arbitrary and irrational and that he was acting on °dictation" (sic) of another person. [3]        I do not intend to repeat the facts, as they are comprehensively dealt with in the judgment of Mngqibisa-Thusi J.Her analysis of the matter is also fully set out, and I respectfully agree with her findings. Suffice it to say, that I find no facts in the papers to support applicant's case. [4]        I may only grant leave to appeal if I believe that an appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success, or if there is another compelling reason why the appeal should be heard. I cannot find so in this case. {5)       For the aforesaid reasons I dismissed the application with costs. SWANEPOEL J JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION PRETORIA sino noindex make_database footer start