Crazy Plastics v Moodley (39002/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 122 (6 February 2024)

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 >> 2024 >> [2024] ZAGPJHC 122 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Crazy Plastics v Moodley (39002/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 122 (6 February 2024) Crazy Plastics v Moodley (39002/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 122 (6 February 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_122.html sino date 6 February 2024 # IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO :  39002/2023 DATE :  06-02-2024 1. Reportable: Yes/No 2. Of interest to other judges: Yes/No 3. Revised: Yes/No In the matter between CRAZY PLASTICS                                            Plaintiff And MOODLEY                                                       Defendant JUDGMENT LEAVE TO APPEAL YACOOB, J : The applicants were the respondents in the main application and seek leave to appeal against my judgment granting various relief in the form of information and financial statements to the respondent. I have read and considered the application for leave to appeal and the heads of argument submitted by the respondent and considered the argument presented today orally by both Mr West and Mr Kela. In my view, the applicants for leave rely on highly technical bases for declining to give the respondent information, as they did in the main application, and seek to protect that position without necessarily having a basis for that protection. I am satisfied that the relief granted is supported by the facts as they were pleaded, including the evidence annexed to the affidavits and by the law. The applicant does not provide, in my view, any legal basis for its position other than its own ipse dixit whereas it seems to require a watertight, belt-and-braces legal basis from the respondent. I am not satisfied that another Court would come to a substantially different conclusion on these particular facts and therefore the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs. YACOOB, J JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT DATE : sino noindex make_database footer start