Coetzee and Others v FL Smidth South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (52443/18) [2020] ZAGPPHC 337 (28 July 2020)

Coetzee and Others v FL Smidth South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (52443/18) [2020] ZAGPPHC 337 (28 July 2020)

The court found that the joinder application was irrelevant, as the legal representatives of the first and second respondents were not parties to the original proceedings but merely acted as the legal team. The dispute regarding costs arose from a misunderstanding between the applicants, who were lay persons, and the respondents' legal team regarding the estimation of party and party costs. The respondents agreed to accept the previously alleged suggested estimation of costs as understood by the applicants. Accordingly, the court varied the consent order to fix the party and party costs at R50,000.00 in full and final settlement of the matter.

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 337
Parties
Applicant: Dorothea Maria Coetzee; Applicant: Jean Barbara Murfin; Applicant: Martin Associates; Respondent: F L Smidth South Africa (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: F L Smidth (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Adv J L Mÿburgh; Respondent: Mr Siafa Chauke; Respondent: Hogan Lovells South Africa Inc
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Case Number
52443/18
Procedural Posture
Variation Application / Judgment on Costs Following Opposed Motion
Outcome
Condonation granted; joinder application struck out; consent order varied to fix costs at R50,000.00; no order as to costs.
Judges
M J Teffo
Legal Topics
Variation of Court Order, Party and Party Costs, Joinder of Parties, Condonation of Late Filing
Civil Procedure Variation of Court Order Party and Party Costs Joinder of Parties Condonation of Late Filing

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorothea Maria Coetzee

Applicant

Jean Barbara Murfin

Applicant

Martin Associates

Applicant

F L Smidth South Africa (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

F L Smidth (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Adv J L Mÿburgh

Respondent

Mr Siafa Chauke

Respondent

Hogan Lovells South Africa Inc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Variation Application / Judgment on Costs Following Opposed Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the application for variation or rescission of the consent order.
  2. 2 Whether the joinder of the third to fifth respondents as parties to the proceedings is appropriate.
  3. 3 Whether the consent order on costs dated 7 August 2018 should be varied due to a genuine dispute of fact regarding the agreed costs amount.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the joinder application was irrelevant, as the legal representatives of the first and second respondents were not parties to the original proceedings but merely acted as the legal team. The dispute regarding costs arose from a misunderstanding between the applicants, who were lay persons, and the respondents' legal team regarding the estimation of party and party costs. The respondents agreed to accept the previously alleged suggested estimation of costs as understood by the applicants. Accordingly, the court varied the consent order to fix the party and party costs at R50,000.00 in full and final settlement of the matter.

Court Disposition

Condonation granted; joinder application struck out; consent order varied to fix costs at R50,000.00; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation of the late filing of the application for variation or rescission of the consent order dated 7 August 2018 is granted.
  • The joinder application is struck out.