PAIA 1
In the High Court, Pietermaritzburg: Brink v LASA: Case no. 11187/16P
Launched 10 October 2016, argued 30 August 2019, decided 6 March 2020, leave to appeal granted 11 June 2020.
Application for exemption from security dismissed; appeal pending
1. Notice of motion and founding affidavit
5. LASA's heads with Brink's rebuttal interpolated
6. Notice under Practice Direction 9.4.4
7. Notice under rules 15 and 28
8. LASA's consent to joinder and amendment of notice of motion
9. Notice under Practice Direction 9.4.2
11. Draft order
12. LASA's application to strike out
13. Brink's notes answering application to strike out
15. Judgment
16. Application for leave to appeal
17. A complaint to the Judge President about the judge's irregular order issued for the disposal of the application for leave to appeal - upheld
19. Notice of Appeal delivered
20. Application for exemption from providing security (a folder containing: notice of application with founding affidavit; answering affidavit; replying affidavit; judgment dismissing application; application for leave to appeal; and application for recusal and for condonation).
___
Why did KwaZulu-Natal judge Esther Steyn erupt so revealingly aggressively-defensively at Brink's oblique hint from the bar that she hadn't troubled herself to study the papers in his PAIA applications against LASA before coming to court, as he'd detected? An examination of the court file afterwards unequivocally turned up her very dishonest reason. Find out here.
***