Case Law[2024] ZAGPJHC 1218South Africa
Ntombela v Minister of Police (23541/2018) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1218 (22 November 2024)
Headnotes
the defendant’s special plea and had dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for wrongful arrest and detention as a result of his failure to have applied for condonation. Each party were ordered to pay its own costs.
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: 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 1218
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Ntombela v Minister of Police (23541/2018) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1218 (22 November 2024)
Ntombela v Minister of Police (23541/2018) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1218 (22 November 2024)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_1218.html
sino date 22 November 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 23541/2018
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF
INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3)
REVISED.
22 November 2024 EJ
Francis
In the matter between:
NTOMBELA,
BONGANI
Plaintiff
and
MINISTER
OF POLICE
Defendant
JUDGMENT
FRANCIS J
1. This is an opposed
application by the applicant for leave to appeal to the full bench of
this court, alternatively to the
Supreme Court of Appeal against the
whole of my judgment and order, delivered on 22 March 2024. This was
after I had upheld the
defendant’s special plea and had
dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for wrongful arrest and
detention as a result of his
failure to have applied for condonation.
Each party were ordered to pay its own costs.
2. The applicant has raised 12
grounds for leave to appeal contained in his application for leave to
appeal dated 3 April
2024. It is unnecessary to repeat those grounds
for leave to appeal. I had found that the plaintiff should have
applied for condonation
which he initially did but then withdrew it
on the first day of the hearing. But for the withdrawal of the
application for condonation
I would have found that the plaintiff’s
arrest and detention was unlawful.
3. The parties were instructed
to file heads of arguments and were informed that the application for
leave to appeal would
be decided on the documents that were so filed.
These were duly filed.
4. I do not deem it necessary to
deal with the grounds for leave to appeal since I have dealt with all
of the issues that
is raised in my comprehensive judgment.
5. The applicant’s
application for leave to appeal is brought in terms of the provisions
of section 17(1)(a)(i) and
(ii) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013
(the
Superior Courts Act). The
aforesaid section provides that leave
to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges concerned are
of the opinion that the
appeal would have a reasonable prospect of
success and that there is a compelling reason why the appeal should
be heard including
conflicting judgments on the matter under
consideration.
6. The applicant has raised
nothing new in his application for leave to appeal. All the issues
that he has raised were dealt
with by me in my judgement. It is
unclear why the applicant had abandoned his application for
condonation. Ultimately the appeal
centres around the special plea
which is linked to the application for condonation. The applicant has
some prospects of success
on whether a proper case was made out for
him not to pursue the issue of condonation.
7. I am persuaded that a proper
case has been made out by the applicant for leave to appeal.
8. Costs are costs in the
appeal.
9. In the circumstances the
following order is made:
9.1 The
application for leave to appeal to the full bench of this court is
granted.
9.2 Costs are
costs in the appeal.
FRANCIS J
HIGH COURT JUDGE
GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION
FOR
PLAINTIFF:
D
MOODLIYAR INSTRUCTED BY LEON JJ
VAN
RENSBURG ATTORNEYS
FOR
DEFENDANT:
R
E MAGONGWA INSTRUCTED BY STATE
ATTORNEY,
JOHANNESBURG
DATE
OF JUDGMENT:
22
NOVEMBER 2024
This judgment was handed down
electronically by circulation to the parties’ and/or parties’
representatives by email
and by being uploaded to caselines. The date
and time for hand-down is deemed to be 10h00 on 22 November 2024.
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Ntombela v Minister of Police (23541/2018) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1064 (24 October 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 1064High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Ntombela and Another v Minister and Police and Others (46654/2017) [2024] ZAGPJHC 124 (13 February 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 124High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Ntombela and Others v S (A116/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 618 (5 July 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 618High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Ntombela v Minister of Police (23541-2018) [2024] ZAGPJHC 294 (22 March 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 294High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Ntombela v Road Accident Fund (14548/2013) [2023] ZAGPJHC 170 (24 February 2023)
[2023] ZAGPJHC 170High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar