africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2023] ZAGPPHC 1772South Africa

Don't Waste Shared Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v Compensation Fund and Others (38343/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1772 (9 October 2023)

High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)
9 October 2023
OTHERS J, LAMATI J, RETIEF J, Administrative J

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: 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 1772 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Don't Waste Shared Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v Compensation Fund and Others (38343/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1772 (9 October 2023) Don't Waste Shared Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v Compensation Fund and Others (38343/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1772 (9 October 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_1772.html sino date 9 October 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case No: 38343/2022 (1)       REPORTABLE: NO (2)       OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES: NO (3)       REVISED SIGNATURE DATE: 09 OCTOBER 2023 In the matter between: DON’T WASTE SHARED SERVICES (PTY) LTD FIRST APPLICANT DON’T WASTE KZN 1 (PTY) LTD SECOND APPLICANT DON’T WASTE KZN 2 (PTY) LTD THIRD APPLICANT DON’T WASTE CTN 1 (PTY) LTD FOURTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE CTN 2 (PTY) LTD FIFTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE EC1 (PTY) LTD SIXTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 1 (PTY) LTD SEVENTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 2 (PTY) LTD EIGHTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 3 (PTY) LTD NINTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 4 (PTY) LTD TENTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 5 (PTY) LTD ELEVENTH APPLICANT DON’T WASTE GAU 6 (PTY) LTD TWELFTH APPLICANT And THE COMPENSATION FUND FIRST RESPONDENT THE COMISSIONER OF THE COMPENSATION FUND SECOND RESPONDENT MINISTER OF EMPLOYMENT AND THIRD RESPONDENT LABOUR: TW MXESI DEPUTY MINISTER OF EMPLOYMENT AND FOURTH RESPONDENT LABOUR: BOITUMELO MOLOI THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF FIFTH RESPONDENT EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR: THOBILE LAMATI #### JUDGMENT JUDGMENT RETIEF J 1. The Second to Twelfth Applicants [Applicants] appeal against those parts of the   judgment which, this Court handed down (ex tempore) on the 21 July 2023, in respect of Part B of the relief sought by the Applicants and costs. The application was argued on the 20 July 2023. 2. The issue for determination was a judicial review brought by way of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 [PAJA] in which the Applicants sought to review and set aside the classification decisions of the First and Second Respondents [Respondents] made in terms of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Disease Act 130 of 1993 [COIDA].. 3. The nub of the grounds of appeal relied on traverse the interpretation and application, if any, of section 91 of COIDA. The Appellants contend, inter alia , that section 91 is not applicable to the Applicants and that reliance and the application thereof, vis n vis as an internal remedy mechanism referred to in PAJA is misplaced. 4. That the provisions of section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 [Superior Courts Act] are satisfied in that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success. The Applicants further rely and, set out reasons in terms of section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Court Act to amplify their section 17 submissions. These reasons appear compelling. 5. Having heard Counsel for both the Applicants and the Respondent I am of the opinion that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success and as such, the following order is made: IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Second to Twelfth Applicants are granted leave to appeal to the Full Bench of this Division. 2. The Respondents are ordered to pay the costs, which costs to be inclusive of two Counsel. L.A. RETIEF Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division Appearances Counsel for the Appellants: Adv. H Gerber SC Adv. M Coetzee Instructed by: Cox Yeats Attorneys c/o Alant, Gell & Martin Inc Counsel for the Respondents: Adv. MC Phathela Instructed by: The State Attorney, Pretoria Leave to Appeal heard on the: 28 September 2023 Leave granted on the: 9 October 2023 sino noindex make_database footer start

Similar Cases

South African Reserve Bank v JAG Import Export (Pty) Limited (2022-007728) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1213 (24 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPPHC 1213High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Sebueng (18628/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1167 (15 September 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 1167High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Koma (2023/023597) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1171 (5 November 2024)
[2024] ZAGPPHC 1171High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Munyai (53307/21) [2026] ZAGPPHC 21 (14 January 2026)
[2026] ZAGPPHC 21High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Mokgobi (13023/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 22 (20 January 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 22High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar

Discussion