Durban businessman Schabir Shaik evaded prison on Friday when he was partly successful in securing an appeal against his corruption and fraud convictions.

High Court judge Hilary Squires granted Shaik leave to challenge one of two corruption convictions, and one of fraud, to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein, albeit on limited grounds.

Clutching what appeared to be a string of prayer beads, Shaik told reporters afterwards he was grateful and intended using the options made available to him.

"Obviously one would have liked to be victorious on all the charges, but we are in the legal process."

Asked whether he would petition the chief justice on those convictions he was denied leave to appeal against by Squires, Shaik said his legal team was considering the matter.

Flanked by his bodyguards, brothers and lawyers, he then excused himself with the words: "I have to go to prayer".

The National Prosecuting Authority said it accepted the judgment, despite some disappointment.

"We are satisfied that the judge applied his mind correctly to all the facts," spokesman Makhosini Nkosi said outside the court. "In some cases we are naturally disappointed, but even then you appreciate the reasons for coming to that decision."

He said it could be a year before the matter came before the SCA.

Squires extended Shaik's R100 000 bail.

Shaik had been sentenced to 15 years in prison on each of the two corruption counts, and another three years for fraud. The sentences were to run concurrently.

"But we are not in a rush, we came prepared for a long haul. We appreciate that he (Shaik) must have the right to... explore all avenues if he believes perhaps another court can come to a different conclusion," Nkosi said.

Squires refused Shaik permission to appeal against his conviction on the first corruption charge, which involves a "generally corrupt relationship" with Zuma, and payments exceeding R1,2 million made to the politician.

On the fraud charge, Shaik was granted leave to challenge a finding that he had discussed with his auditors the irregular write-off of loans, some of which had been to Zuma.

On Count 3, the other corruption charge, he was allowed to ask the SCA whether the trial court had been correct in admitting as evidence an encrypted fax.

The fax detailed a meeting at which Shaik allegedly negotiated a R500 000-a-year bribe for Zuma. The bribe, from French arms company Thomson-CSF, was to be in return for Zuma's protection in a probe into South Africa's multi-billion rand arms deal.

In judgment of around 20 pages, Squires repeated his earlier finding that payments to Zuma could not have been for any reason other to secure his influence and goodwill in Shaik's business ventures.

Zuma's own intentions, and whether or not he actually delivered anything in return, were not at issue, Squires said. But he did find that the former deputy president had intervened on Shaik's account on more than one occasion.

Squires found that Shaik's Nkobi group of companies was obviously struggling because of the payments, and that no sane businessman would persist unless he was expecting something in return.

He stressed that the payments were not made to a lowly bureaucrat, but the second highest office in the land.

As to sentencing, Squires reiterated he could not find substantial or compelling circumstances justifying a penalty other than the mandatory 15 years in jail.

Should Shaik fail in his bid to the SCA on the other two counts, Squires said, there would be no merits for interfering with the sentences he had imposed.

Squires also granted some of Shaik's co-accused companies limited leave to appeal against their guilty verdicts and the fines he had imposed on them.

The judge found that the SCA was the proper avenue of appeal since it was "desirable that an answer should come from the highest court".

If no petition was filed with the SCA within 21 days, the fines imposed on those of Shaik's companies not granted leave by Squires to appeal would have to be paid by August 31.

If leave to appeal was refused by the SCA, all the fines must be paid within 48 hours.

Arguing his application before Squires on Tuesday, Shaik's legal team said camaraderie and friendship, not self-interest were behind the payments to Zuma. Shaik or his companies never received any "quid pro quo".

Zuma was relieved of his duties following Shaik's conviction, and is to go on trial on related charges later this year.

On the fraud charge, Shaik maintains he had no knowledge of the irregular write-off.

Regarding the second corruption charge, he challenges the authenticity of the encrypted fax and the trustworthiness of its author, Thomson official Alain Thetard.

The prosecution had argued there was no reasonable prospect of another court coming to a different conclusion based on Squires' analysis of the facts.

With acknowledgements to Mariette le Roux and Sapa.