Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd v Ed Foods S.R.L (2022/1245) [2022] ZAGPJHC 1048 (28 December 2022)

Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd v Ed Foods S.R.L (2022/1245) [2022] ZAGPJHC 1048 (28 December 2022)

The court found that the commissioner's affidavit was properly filed as part of the replying papers and was neither out of sequence nor out of time. There was no requirement for EDF to obtain court permission under Rule 6(5)(e) to deliver the affidavit, and its delivery was not irregular. Regarding the founding...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 1048
Parties
Applicant: Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: ED Food S.R.L.
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 December 2022
Case Number
2022/1245
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Affidavits and Supporting Documents
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
RJ Moultrie
Legal Topics
Authentication of Documents, Commissioning of Affidavits, Rule 63 Uniform Rules, Justices of the Peace Act, Virtual Commissioning
Civil Procedure Authentication of Documents Commissioning of Affidavits Rule 63 Uniform Rules Justices of the Peace Act Virtual Commissioning

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

ED Food S.R.L.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Interlocutory Application to Strike Out Affidavits and Supporting Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the commissioner's affidavit was irregularly filed and should be struck out under Rule 30 and Rule 30A.
  2. 2 Whether the founding affidavits executed outside South Africa should be struck out for non-compliance with Rule 63 of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  3. 3 Whether failure to authenticate affidavits in terms of Rule 63 constitutes non-compliance justifying striking out under Rule 30A.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the commissioner's affidavit was properly filed as part of the replying papers and was neither out of sequence nor out of time. There was no requirement for EDF to obtain court permission under Rule 6(5)(e) to deliver the affidavit, and its delivery was not irregular. Regarding the founding affidavits, while they were executed outside South Africa and not authenticated in terms of Rule 63, Rule 63(4) permits authentication by other reliable evidence. The procedures in Rule 63 are directory, not mandatory, and EDF's reliance on the commissioner's affidavit as evidence of authenticity was permissible. The failure to authenticate in terms of Rule 63 did not amount to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to strike out the commissioner's affidavit and the founding affidavits is dismissed.
  • Costs are awarded to the respondent (ED Food S.R.L.).