Mtshali & others v Buffalo Conservation 97 (Pty) Ltd

The appellants (Dr Dumisani Mtshali NO, the National Directorate of Animal Health, and the Minister of Agriculture and Environmental Affairs) appealed against a High Court judgment holding them delictually liable to Buffalo Conservation 97 (Pty) Ltd for failing to conduct disease tests and issue permits for the translocation of disease-free buffalo. After leave to appeal was granted, the appellants failed to file the appeal record timeously. Extensions were granted, but the record was still not filed, causing the appeal to lapse in December 2015. For more than a year thereafter, the appellants’ attorney took no effective steps to prosecute the appeal. Despite the respondent taxing and being paid costs and taking steps to proceed on quantum, the appellants only served the record and an application for condonation in December 2016, and properly filed them in March 2017. The explanation for the prolonged delays rested largely on the appellants’ attorney’s workload, illness, administrative difficulties, and lack of urgency.

The application for condonation and for the reinstatement of the appeal was dismissed with costs.

This case is an important reaffirmation by the Supreme Court of Appeal of the strict approach to condonation and compliance with appellate procedural rules. It underscores that extreme and inadequately explained delays will not be excused, even where an appeal may have reasonable or strong prospects of success, and that litigants— including organs of state—may be held to the consequences of their attorneys’ neglect.