Level 7 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Level 7 v Signature Restaurant Group (Pty) Ltd (051229/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1290 (29 November 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 1290 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Level 7 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Level 7 v Signature Restaurant Group (Pty) Ltd (051229/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1290 (29 November 2024) Level 7 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd t/a Level 7 v Signature Restaurant Group (Pty) Ltd (051229/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1290 (29 November 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_1290.html sino date 29 November 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO :  051229/2023 DATE :  29-11-2024 (1) REPORTABLE:  NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:  NO. (3) REVISED. 29 November 2024 In the matter between LEVEL SEVEN RESTAURANT (PTY) LTD Applicant and SIGNATURE RESTAURANT GROUP (PTY) LTD Respondent JUDGMENT EX TEMPORE : LEAVE TO APPEAL WILSON, J :  The applicant, Level Seven, seeks leave to appeal against my judgment of 25 September 2024, in which I concluded that it is not open to Level Seven to appeal to the High Court against an arbitrator’s award by which it is aggrieved. The fundamental basis for that decision was that section 28 of the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 cannot be interpreted to permit such an appeal. Even if it could, that is no reason to accept Level Seven’s argument that such an interpretation would better promote the spirit purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. Those conclusions notwithstanding, I am persuaded that an appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal ought to be permitted. I regard Level Seven’s prospects of success on appeal as fairly weak. However, given that the Supreme Court of Appeal has not yet considered the proper interpretation of section 28 , I think that Level Seven’s prospects are not so weak as to deprive me of a compelling reason to send the matter on appeal. It is, in my view, in the interests of justice for the questions Level Seven raises about the appealability of arbitral awards to be resolved authoritatively by a court of national jurisdisction. For all those reasons I make the following order- 1. The application for leave to appeal is granted. 2. Leave is granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal. 3. The costs of the application for leave to appeal are to be costs in the appeal WILSON, J JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT 29 November 2024 sino noindex make_database footer start