x , Ke, Seve 3 Apel gare IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Case No.: 5320/19 On Wednesday, 3 April 2019 at CAPE TOWN Before Mr Acting Justice Sievers In the matter between: VISEC SUB SAHARA (PTY) LTD ‘Applicant and i Renae PHILEX INCORPORATED iv Bap Kose, PRL Repent | RSA WEB (PTY) LTD 2019 -fieogey Respondent © Having heard counsel for the applicant, ex parte, the following order is granted: 1. A tule nisi is issued calling on the respondents and all other interested parties to show cause on 30 APRIL 2019 at 10:00 or so soon thereafter as counsel may be heard why a final order in the following terms should not be made: 1.1, That the applicant's possession and control of the entire software system and database referred to and known as “the VISEC CLOUD”, being anumber-plate recognition software system and database currently hosted on the second respondent's servers (‘the system’) is to be restored to the applicant’s possession forthwith, as follows: LLL 1.1.2. The second respondent shall provide the applicant with all of the usernames and passwords required to gain access to, and possession and control of, the system, in the second respondents possession; ‘The second respondent shall inform the applicant in writing of the exact location of the servers on which the system is being hosted; . The second respondent shall provide the applicant with physical access to the servers at the second respondent’s data centres on which the system is hosted, and assist the applicant in the manner contemplated in paragraph 1.2 below, to the extent that it is in the second respondent's control, to return the system to the possession and control of the applicant, supervised by such experts as may be appointed by the applicant, at the applicant's cost. The second respondent's assistance, as envisaged in paragraph 1.1.3 le (but not be limited to):13. Resetting the usernames and passwords allowing remote access to the system; Disconnecting the servers hosting the system from the network, and providing the applicant with remote access via the Internet; Permitting the applicant to add additional equipment wherever the servers are located in order to enuble the recovery of access to and possession and control of the system; and 1.2.4. Allowing the applicant physical access to the servers and, insofar as it may be necessary, access to the solid state of conventional drives in order to remove such drives, to reconfigure all passwords and usernames and reactivating and reconnecting the system for use by the applicant and its clients; ‘That the first respondent (and the second respondent, only in the event of it opposing the application) pay the applicant's costs, including the costs of two counsel.Paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 above shall be implemented with immediate The application and the order will only be served on the first respondent (as envisaged below) once paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 have been implemented and possession of the system has been restored to the applicant, Pending implementation of paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 above, and restoration of the system to the applicant, the second respondent shall not alert the first respondent or any other party of the application or the order granted Either of the respondents may anticipate the return date on not less than 48 hours’ 2. Pending the return date of the rule nisi: 21, effect; 2.2. 23, in any manner; 3. notice to the applicant's attorneys of record; 4. ‘The application and this order is to be served on the first respondent, after paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 have been implemented and possession of the system has been restored to the applicant, “Bycthe: sheriff, onthe Catieron; eg x9020, Cape Town 8000 2019 -04- 03 as follows: first respondent’s attorney, John Joseph Finlay ‘at Hurlingham Office Park, Block G, Ground Floor, comer of42. ‘William Nichol and Republic Roads, Sandton (entrance in Woodlands Avenue); By email at the following email addresses; 4.2.1. Attorney John Joseph Finlay Cameron: johncam@mweb.co.za; 4.2.2. Alexander Bordbar: alex@visec.com and alex@philex.net; 4.2.3. Jason Bordbar: jason@visee.com, In the event that either of the respondents intend opposing this application on the return date mentioned above, they are required: 5.1. 5.2. by not later than 3 (THREE) days after receipt of the application and any order granted to indicate their intention to oppose the matter and to appoint in such notice an address, within 15km of the office of the Registrar of this Court, at which they will accept notice and service of all process in these proceedings; by not later than 7 (SEVEN) days after giving notice is given as nplated in paragraph 5.1 above, to file an answering affidavit, if