Court denies Dlamini leave to appeal in rescission case
JOHANNESBURG - The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has dismissed an application by Margaret Siphiliswe Dlamini for leave to appeal after finding that she failed to establish a bona fide defence to a claim brought against her by Sawindu 08 (RF) (Pty) Ltd.
Acting Judge Sarita Liebenberg dismissed the application with costs in a judgment delivered on September 18, 2026.
The application followed an earlier ruling in which the court refused Dlamini's application for rescission of judgment.
Dlamini had sought rescission under common law, which requires an applicant to demonstrate both that the default was not wilful and that they have a bona fide defence to the claim.
The court found that Dlamini had satisfied the first requirement.
Judge Liebenberg accepted her explanation that she was not in wilful default, including her contention that she had not been properly served with the relevant court documents.
The court noted that this explanation was supported by a discrepancy between the address reflected in the sheriff's return of service and the address of the property concerned.
However, the court found that Dlamini failed to meet the second requirement of establishing a bona fide defence.
"However, she failed to demonstrate a bona fide defence," Judge Liebenberg said.
According to the judgment, Dlamini's defence was presented in vague terms and lacked sufficient detail to support her position.
The court noted that Sawindu 08 attached a statement of account to its answering affidavit setting out payments allegedly made by Dlamini and how those payments had been allocated and reallocated.
The statement indicated that Dlamini's account remained in arrears.
Judge Liebenberg said Dlamini had been afforded an opportunity to address the statement of account in her replying affidavit but failed to do so.
"I am satisfied that no other Court would come to a different conclusion than I did in respect of the rescission application and the absence of a bona fide defence," the judge ruled.
The court consequently found that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
"In the circumstances, the application for leave to appeal cannot succeed and it is dismissed with costs," Judge Liebenberg ordered.
