Bayard NO and Others v Strategy House (Pty) Ltd and Others (26469/17) [2019] ZAGPJHC 7 (17 January 2019)

Bayard NO and Others v Strategy House (Pty) Ltd and Others (26469/17) [2019] ZAGPJHC 7 (17 January 2019)

The court found the respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the late filing of answering affidavits, rendering their condonation application unsustainable. The defence of res judicata was rejected because the prior order was not a final determination of all issues between the parties; the matter had been placed on the opposed roll for adjudication. The applicants, as properly cited trustees, had locus standi to bring the application. The respondents' argument regarding restitution was dismissed, as the claim related to repayment of a loan, not the return of shares. The court held that the facts were largely common cause, and no genuine dispute of fact existed. The...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 7
Parties
Applicant: Jerenique Bayard N.O; Applicant: Sarita Erica Ricks N.O; Applicant: Roy Abrahams N.O; Respondent: Strategy House (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Lydon Barends; Respondent: CJ Benjamin
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 January 2019
Case Number
26469/17
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment After Opposed Motion and Condonation Applications
Outcome
Application granted. Respondents ordered to pay the loan amount, interest, and costs. Counter-application dismissed.
Judges
E Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Condonation, Locus Standi, Res Judicata, Loan Agreement, Default Judgment
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Specific Performance Condonation Locus Standi Res Judicata Loan Agreement Default Judgment

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

Parties

Jerenique Bayard N.O

Applicant

Sarita Erica Ricks N.O

Applicant

Roy Abrahams N.O

Applicant

Strategy House (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Lydon Barends

Respondent

CJ Benjamin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment After Opposed Motion and Condonation Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are jointly and severally liable to repay the loan amount to the applicant as per the agreement.
  2. 2 Whether condonation for the late filing of answering affidavits should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the defence of res judicata applies to the present proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the respondents failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the late filing of answering affidavits, rendering their condonation application unsustainable. The defence of res judicata was rejected because the prior order was not a final determination of all issues between the parties; the matter had been placed on the opposed roll for adjudication. The applicants, as properly cited trustees, had locus standi to bring the application. The respondents' argument regarding restitution was dismissed, as the claim related to repayment of a loan, not the return of shares. The court held that the facts were largely common cause, and no genuine dispute of fact existed. The...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Respondents ordered to pay the loan amount, interest, and costs. Counter-application dismissed.

Orders

  • The First, Second, and Third Respondents are ordered to pay the Applicant an amount of R1 350 000.00 within 30 days of the date of this order, the one paying the other to be absolved.
  • The Respondents are to pay interest on the above amount at the prescribed rate.