R.D.D v V.D.D (2024/067120; A2024/005340) [2025] ZAGPJHC 859 (5 September 2025)

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: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPJHC 859 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## R.D.D v V.D.D (2024/067120; A2024/005340) [2025] ZAGPJHC 859 (5 September 2025) R.D.D v V.D.D (2024/067120; A2024/005340) [2025] ZAGPJHC 859 (5 September 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_859.html sino date 5 September 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG) Case nos. 2024-067120 and A2024-005340 (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED. SIGNATURE           DATE: 5 September 2025 In the matter between: R[…] D[…] D[…] Applicant and V[…] D[…] D[…] Respondent ##### JUDGMENT JUDGMENT WILSON J (with whom MABESELE J agrees): 1 The applicant, Mr. D[…], seeks leave to appeal against our order of 6 May 2025, in which we dismissed an appeal and a review of decisions of the Magistrates’ Court to disallow disbursements claimed by him on a bill of costs drawn in relation to litigation in that court. 2 Insofar as the order on the appeal is concerned, we have no power to grant leave to appeal against our decision. Section 16 (1) (b) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 makes clear that an appeal against decision of this court on appeal to it can only be pursued with the special leave of the Supreme Court of Appeal. That this is the position was confirmed in Lewis and Another v Vexma Properties 329 CC, In Re: Vexma Properties 329 CC v Lewis [2015] ZAGPPHC 325 (8 May 2015). 3 We do, though, have the power to grant leave to appeal against our order on the review. But Mr. D[…]’s proposed appeal against that order stands no prospects of success. Since Mr. D[…]’s arguments in support of his application for leave to appeal were no more than a regurgitation of his submissions a quo , it is unnecessary to say anything more about them than we said in our judgment a quo . Mr. D[..] was given a full opportunity to explain why that judgment might be wrong. He was unable to persuade us that there was any prospect that a court of appeal would think so. 4 There is no need to make a costs order. 5 For all these reasons – 5.1   The application for leave to appeal against the order granted on appeal is struck from the roll. 5.2   The application for leave to appeal against the dismissal of the review application is dismissed. S D J WILSON Judge of the High Court This judgment is handed down electronically by circulation to the parties or their legal representatives by email, by uploading it to the electronic file of this matter on Caselines, and by publication of the judgment to the South African Legal Information Institute. The date for hand-down is deemed to be 5 September 2025. HEARD ON:                              4 September 2025 DECIDED ON:                          5 September 2025 For the Applicant:                      In person For the Respondent:                 In person sino noindex make_database footer start