ABSA Technologies Finance Solutions (Pty) Ltd v ICT Globe Management (Pty) Ltd (2513/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 416 (12 June 2018)

ABSA Technologies Finance Solutions (Pty) Ltd v ICT Globe Management (Pty) Ltd (2513/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 416 (12 June 2018)

The court held that Rule 18(6) requires a party relying on a written contract in its pleadings to annex a copy of the contract, regardless of which party originally possessed it. The Respondent's argument that it need not attach the contract because it was provided by the Applicant was rejected, as the Respondent had exercised remedies under Rule 35(12) and was in possession of the agreement. The conditional nature of the counterclaim did not excuse compliance with Rule 18(6), as the counterclaim could not stand independently and was premised on the existence of a valid contract. The court found that the Applicant was prejudiced by the failure to attach the contract, as it was unable to...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 416
Parties
Applicant: ABSA Technologies Finance Solutions (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: ICT Globe Management (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 June 2018
Case Number
2513/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Removal of Cause of Complaint Under Rule 30(1) and Counter Application to Compel Compliance With Rule 35(12)
Outcome
The Rule 30(1) application succeeds and the conditional counterclaim is set aside. The Respondent is granted leave to amend its pleading within 15 days. The Applicant is awarded costs of the Rule 30 application, including unopposed costs of 7 February 2018. Prayer 1 of the Respondent's counter-application is...
Judges
B Neukircher
Legal Topics
Rule 18 6 Contract Pleading, Rule 30 Irregular Proceedings, Rule 35 12 Document Inspection, Conditional Counterclaim, Breach of Contract
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Rule 18 6 Contract Pleading Rule 30 Irregular Proceedings Rule 35 12 Document Inspection Conditional Counterclaim Breach of Contract

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABSA Technologies Finance Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

ICT Globe Management (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Removal of Cause of Complaint Under Rule 30(1) and Counter Application to Compel Compliance With Rule 35(12)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent's conditional counterclaim is irregular for failing to attach the written contract relied upon, as required by Rule 18(6).
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant is prejudiced by the Respondent's failure to attach the contract.
  3. 3 Whether compliance with Rule 35(12) requires actual inspection of original documents, not merely provision of copies.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Rule 18(6) requires a party relying on a written contract in its pleadings to annex a copy of the contract, regardless of which party originally possessed it. The Respondent's argument that it need not attach the contract because it was provided by the Applicant was rejected, as the Respondent had exercised remedies under Rule 35(12) and was in possession of the agreement. The conditional nature of the counterclaim did not excuse compliance with Rule 18(6), as the counterclaim could not stand independently and was premised on the existence of a valid contract. The court found that the Applicant was prejudiced by the failure to attach the contract, as it was unable to...

Court Disposition

The Rule 30(1) application succeeds and the conditional counterclaim is set aside. The Respondent is granted leave to amend its pleading within 15 days. The Applicant is awarded costs of the Rule 30 application, including unopposed costs of 7 February 2018. Prayer 1 of the Respondent's counter-application is...

Orders

  • The Rule 30(1) application succeeds and the conditional counterclaim is set aside.
  • The Respondent/Defendant has 15 days from the date of this order to amend its pleading.