ABSA Bank Limted v Ursula Felicity Rezant No (2451/2020) [2024] ZAECQBHC 36 (23 January 2024)

ABSA Bank Limted v Ursula Felicity Rezant No (2451/2020) [2024] ZAECQBHC 36 (23 January 2024)

The court held that the defendant failed to bring a formal application for condonation supported by affidavit, as required by Rule 27 of the Uniform Rules. Consequently, the late replying affidavit was not accepted. On the merits of the amendment, the court considered the principles governing amendments to pleadings, including the need for bona fides, absence of irremediable prejudice, and the facilitation of the proper ventilation of disputes. The court found that, despite procedural shortcomings and delay, the interests of justice required that the defendant be granted leave to amend her plea. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the amendment, noting that any potential...

Citation
[2024] ZAECQBHC 36
Parties
Plaintiff: ABSA Bank Limited; Defendant: Ursula Felicity Rezant NO
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Case Number
2451/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Amendment of Plea Prior to Trial
Outcome
Leave to amend the plea granted; each party to pay its own costs.
Judges
Zilwa
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Rule 27 Condonation, Special Plea, Court Discretion, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Rule 27 Condonation Special Plea Court Discretion Costs Order

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABSA Bank Limited

Plaintiff

Ursula Felicity Rezant NO

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Amendment of Plea Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's late replying affidavit should be accepted without a formal condonation application.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should be granted leave to amend her plea as per Rule 28 of the Uniform Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendment is bona fide and in the interests of justice.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the defendant failed to bring a formal application for condonation supported by affidavit, as required by Rule 27 of the Uniform Rules. Consequently, the late replying affidavit was not accepted. On the merits of the amendment, the court considered the principles governing amendments to pleadings, including the need for bona fides, absence of irremediable prejudice, and the facilitation of the proper ventilation of disputes. The court found that, despite procedural shortcomings and delay, the interests of justice required that the defendant be granted leave to amend her plea. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the amendment, noting that any potential...

Court Disposition

Leave to amend the plea granted; each party to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • The defendant is granted leave to amend her plea as per the notice dated 29 August 2023 in terms of Rule 28 of the Uniform Rules.
  • Each party shall pay its own costs.