Absa Bank Ltd v Sibanzi Construction CC (13045/2009) [2009] ZAGPPHC 195 (29 May 2009)

Absa Bank Ltd v Sibanzi Construction CC (13045/2009) [2009] ZAGPPHC 195 (29 May 2009)

The court found that the answering affidavit was delivered only one day late, with a public holiday intervening, and that insisting on a formal application for condonation would be unreasonable and a waste of costs. The respondent raised a bona fide defence regarding the alleged non-compliance with sections 129 and 130 of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005. There were insufficient facts before the court to determine whether the Act applied or whether its provisions were complied with. Accordingly, condonation for the late delivery was granted and the defendant was given leave to defend.

Citation
[2009] ZAGPPHC 195
Parties
Plaintiff: Absa Bank Ltd; Defendant: Sibanzi Construction CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 2009
Case Number
13045/2009
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment; Condonation for Late Delivery of Answering Affidavit
Outcome
Condonation for the late delivery of the answering affidavit is granted and the defendant is given leave to defend. Costs will be costs in the cause.
Judges
Botha
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Condonation, Answering Affidavit, National Credit Act
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Condonation Answering Affidavit National Credit Act

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Absa Bank Ltd

Plaintiff

Sibanzi Construction CC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment; Condonation for Late Delivery of Answering Affidavit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late delivery of the answering affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant has raised a bona fide defence to the summary judgment application.
  3. 3 Whether sections 129 and 130 of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 were complied with.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the answering affidavit was delivered only one day late, with a public holiday intervening, and that insisting on a formal application for condonation would be unreasonable and a waste of costs. The respondent raised a bona fide defence regarding the alleged non-compliance with sections 129 and 130 of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005. There were insufficient facts before the court to determine whether the Act applied or whether its provisions were complied with. Accordingly, condonation for the late delivery was granted and the defendant was given leave to defend.

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late delivery of the answering affidavit is granted and the defendant is given leave to defend. Costs will be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The late delivery of the answering affidavit is condoned.
  • Leave to defend is granted.