{"issue_text":"Whether respondents' notice of appeal was valid without first obtaining leave to appeal","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Interim order granted, notice of appeal filed without leave"}
{"issue_text":"Whether court should recuse itself from hearing application for leave to execute","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Same judge who granted interim order"}
{"issue_text":"Whether matter should be referred to Constitutional Court","issue_type":"constitutional","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Allegation of institutional bias"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant obtained an interim interdict against respondents on 17 May 2017. Respondents filed a notice of appeal to Supreme Court on 29 May 2017 without first obtaining leave to appeal. Applicant then filed urgent chamber application for leave to execute the interdict pending appeal.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases