Classic Number Trading 171 (PTY) Limited v Pick n Pay Retailers (PTY) LTD (1580/2018) [2018] ZAGPPHC 826 (24 August 2018)

Classic Number Trading 171 (PTY) Limited v Pick n Pay Retailers (PTY) LTD (1580/2018) [2018] ZAGPPHC 826 (24 August 2018)

The court found that the applicant's proposed amendments to the particulars of claim did not cure the substantive defects identified by the respondent. The amendments failed to provide the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action and did not distinguish the first alternative claim from the main claim, rendering both vague and embarrassing. The court held that the failure to reach agreement on essential terms, as required by clause 40.6 of the franchise agreement, does not constitute a breach by the defendant, as the clause provides a mechanism for determination by the defendant's auditors. The court allowed only minor amendments relating to the deletion of the words 'spoliation...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 826
Parties
Applicant: Classic Number Trading 171 (PTY) Limited; Respondent: Pick n Pay Retailers (PTY) LTD
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 August 2018
Case Number
1580/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application to amend particulars of claim substantially refused; minor amendments allowed; costs awarded against applicant.
Judges
Bester
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Franchise Agreement, Breach of Contract, Damages, Specific Performance
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Franchise Agreement Breach of Contract Damages Specific Performance

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Classic Number Trading 171 (PTY) Limited

Applicant

Pick n Pay Retailers (PTY) LTD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's proposed amendments to the particulars of claim cure the defects identified by the defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the amended claims contain the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action.
  3. 3 Whether the first alternative claim is distinguishable from the main claim and is not vague and embarrassing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's proposed amendments to the particulars of claim did not cure the substantive defects identified by the respondent. The amendments failed to provide the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action and did not distinguish the first alternative claim from the main claim, rendering both vague and embarrassing. The court held that the failure to reach agreement on essential terms, as required by clause 40.6 of the franchise agreement, does not constitute a breach by the defendant, as the clause provides a mechanism for determination by the defendant's auditors. The court allowed only minor amendments relating to the deletion of the words 'spoliation...

Court Disposition

Application to amend particulars of claim substantially refused; minor amendments allowed; costs awarded against applicant.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's particulars of claim are amended by deleting the words 'spoliation and' from the heading between paragraphs 25 and 26.
  • Annexure POC3 to the particulars of claim is replaced with the document marked POC3 to the notice of intention to amend.