Western Johannesburg Rent Board and Another v Ursula Mansions (Pty) Ltd

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Centlivres JA, Greenberg JA and Davis AJA
• Judgment Date: 26 May 1948
• Citation: 1948 (3) SA 353 (A)
• Hearing Date: 26 May 1948
• Court: Appellate Division

Western Johannesburg Rent Board and Another v Ursula Mansions (Pty) Ltd
1948 (3) SA 353 (A)

1948 (3) SA p353

Citation	1948 (3) SA 353 (A)
Court	Appellate Division
Judge	Centlivres JA, Greenberg JA and Davis AJA
Heard	May 26, 1948
Judgment	May 26, 1948

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Appeal — Appellate Division — Notice of appeal not in order — Court raising point mero motu — Appeal struck off roll — Costs.

Headnote : Kopnota

The Court, having mero motu raised the point that the notice of appeal was not against the Court's order but against that part of the reasons for judgment in which the Court a quo had held that the appellants had acted arbitrarily, struck the appeal off the roll with costs.

Case Information

Appeal from a decision in the Transvaal Provincial Division (MILLIN, J.). [*]

F. Rumpff, for the appellants.

I. A. Maisels, K.C. (with him W. W. Kantor), for the respondent.

1948 (3) SA p354

[CENTLIVRES, J.A.: Is the notice of appeal in order? Is it not a notice of appeal against the reasons for the judgment of the Court a quo and not against its order? See Molteno Bros v South African Railways (1936 AD 408).]

The Court adjourned to enable Counsel to consider the point. On the resumption -

Rumpff: I apply for an amendment of the notice. If this is not granted I submit that there should be no order as to costs as the Court raised the matter mero motu; cf. Mavromati v Union Exploration Import (Pty.) Ltd. (1947 (4), S.A.L.R. 192 at p. 198).

Maisels, K.C.: I do not consent to the amendment. There is no reason why, in accordance with the ordinary principle applicable, respondent should not be awarded costs if the appeal is struck off the roll.

[The appeal was struck off the roll with costs and the following reasons were handed in on 2nd June.]

Judgment

Centlivres, J.A.:

In this case the appeal was struck off the roll with costs and it was intimated that reasons would be given later. The following are the reasons.

In this matter, which came before MILLIN, J., in the Transvaal Provincial Division, the Western Johannesburg Rent Board was the first respondent and the Rent Control Board the second respondent. MILLIN, J. made the following order:

'1. That the proceedings and the decision of the first respondent and the confirmation thereof by the second respondent on the applicants' application for a review of the rentals payable in respect of Ursula Mansions be and are hereby set aside and remitted...