[1]      This is an application for leave to appeal against an order handed down by this Court restraining the Applicants from making any further payments to the Lizelle Sake Trust (the 3rd to 6th Applicants) pending the final adjudication of a review application launched by the Respondent. The said Trust was also ordered to return to the Metsimaholo Local Municipality the full quantum of any funds already received from the Municipality, pending the final outcome of the review proceedings. The majority of the Applicants for leave are the Municipality and its relevant functionaries. The 7th Applicant is the arbitrator in arbitration proceedings that were held between the Trust and the Municipality, and he is not applying for leave to appeal.

[2]      When the application for leave came before the Court, the Court expressed its concern whether leave should be granted in instances, like the present, where the intended appeal is directed against an interim order that was handed down pending the final outcome of a future review. Counsel appearing for the respective parties were consequently requested to address the Court on this issue, and many submissions were made in the process on behalf of the parties.

[3]      Now generally, Courts are reluctant to hear appeals against interim orders that have no final effect and that are, in any event, susceptible to reconsideration by a Court when the final relief is determined.[1]  That, however, is not an inflexible rule. What best serves the interest of justice dictates whether an appeal against an interim order should be entertained. In the instances where leave to appeal in relation to interim orders were in fact granted, it was made clear that the operative standard is the interest of justice.[2]

[4]      In their grounds of appeal, the Applicants do not pertinently rely on the interests of justice, although this aspect was raised on their behalf when submissions were made at the hearing of the application.