Calitz and Others v Minister of Police (62934/2014) [2022] ZAGPPHC 102 (17 February 2022)

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 >> 2022 >> [2022] ZAGPPHC 102 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Calitz and Others v Minister of Police (62934/2014) [2022] ZAGPPHC 102 (17 February 2022) Calitz and Others v Minister of Police (62934/2014) [2022] ZAGPPHC 102 (17 February 2022) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2022_102.html sino date 17 February 2022 REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED: NO Date:    17  February 2022 CASE NO: 62934/2014 In the matter between: JOLANDIE CALITZ AND TWO OTHERS N.O.                                                  APPLICANT and MINISTER OF POLICE                                                                                          RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Van der Schyff J Introduction [1] In this judgment, the parties are referred to as in the action. [2] The plaintiff filed an application for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment and order delivered on 29 October 2021. The plaintiff raised several grounds of appeal. I do not intend to deal with these grounds herein, as I handed down a written judgment wherein I dealt extensively with the reasons for my findings. [3] It is trite that to succeed in an application for leave to appeal, ‘more is required to be established than that there is a mere possibility of success, that the case is arguable on appeal or that the case cannot be categorised as hopeless.’ [1] After considering the grounds of appeal, I am not of the opinion that, on the unique facts of this case and the evidence presented, a reasonable probability exists that another court would come to a different conclusion. ORDER In the result, the following order is made: 1. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. E van der Schyff Judge of the High Court Delivered:  This judgement is handed down electronically by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on CaseLines. It will be sent to the parties/their legal representatives by email as a courtesy gesture. The date for hand-down is deemed to be 16 February 2022. Counsel for the applicant:                            Adv. L Kellerman SC With:                                                            Adv. W Gibbs Instructed by:                                               OKEKE Attorneys Counsel for the respondent:                         Adv. M W Van Zyl SC With:                                                            Adv. D G V O Sevenster Instructed by:                                               State Attorney, Pretoria Date of the hearing:                                     9 February 2022 Date of judgment:                                          17 February 2022 [1] Smith v S 2012 (1) SACR 567 (SCA) at para 7. sino noindex make_database footer start