MOGOENG J to be considered with regard to the interests of justice include the reason for the delay, and the extent of the prejudice, if any, that was suffered by the other party. [29] The application for leave to appeal to this Court was filed slightly over three weeks late. The applicant had, however, within the time period provided for in the Rules of this Court, informed the State Attorney17 of her intention to launch the application. The state was thus not left to assume that when the dies expired it could conduct its affairs on the basis that the applicant had no intention to challenge the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal. [30] The reasons proffered for the delay are that: (i) the applicant was waiting for an opinion from counsel on whether there were prospects of success; and (ii) the delays in relation to settling the papers for her application for leave to appeal were caused by problems experienced by her legal representatives but not by any fault on her part. This explanation is, in my view, reasonable. [31] The Minister suffered no prejudice as the state had been informed, within the prescribed time period, of the intention to launch the application for leave to appeal. In addition, the delay was not overly long and the Minister does not oppose the granting of condonation. It is in the interests of justice to grant condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal. I deal next with the late filing of the Minister‘s submissions. 17 The State Attorney is the attorney for the Minister. 11