Coleman N.O and Others v Absa Bank Limited (14281/2010) [2018] ZAGPPHC 309 (4 May 2018)

Coleman N.O and Others v Absa Bank Limited (14281/2010) [2018] ZAGPPHC 309 (4 May 2018)

The court found that the Registrar was competent to grant default judgment because the applicants failed to comply with the court order to file an amended plea, and notices to amend do not constitute pleadings. The procedural requirements of Rule 31(5)(a) were satisfied, as the notice of intention to apply for default judgment was properly served on the applicants' attorney. The delay in granting judgment was due to administrative issues and did not prejudice the applicants, nor did it render the summons stale. The applicants had no defence to the monetary claim, and the judgment was not erroneously granted. The application for rescission was accordingly dismissed.

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 309
Parties
Applicant: Lydia Coleman N.O.; Applicant: Franca Colomba Groenewald N.O.; Applicant: Lydia Coleman; Applicant: Franca Colomba Groenewald; Respondent: Absa Bank Limited
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 May 2018
Case Number
14281/2010
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment Granted by Registrar
Outcome
Application for rescission of judgment dismissed with costs on attorney and own client scale.
Judges
S. Potterill
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Rule 31, Mortgage Bond Enforcement, Suretyship, National Credit Act Compliance
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Rule 31 Mortgage Bond Enforcement Suretyship National Credit Act Compliance

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lydia Coleman N.O.

Applicant

Franca Colomba Groenewald N.O.

Applicant

Lydia Coleman

Applicant

Franca Colomba Groenewald

Applicant

Absa Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment Granted by Registrar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar was competent to grant default judgment after a plea had been filed and set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the application for default judgment was properly served on the applicants in terms of Rule 31(5)(a).
  3. 3 Whether the delay between the application for default judgment and its granting rendered the summons stale and the judgment irregular.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Registrar was competent to grant default judgment because the applicants failed to comply with the court order to file an amended plea, and notices to amend do not constitute pleadings. The procedural requirements of Rule 31(5)(a) were satisfied, as the notice of intention to apply for default judgment was properly served on the applicants' attorney. The delay in granting judgment was due to administrative issues and did not prejudice the applicants, nor did it render the summons stale. The applicants had no defence to the monetary claim, and the judgment was not erroneously granted. The application for rescission was accordingly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission of judgment dismissed with costs on attorney and own client scale.

Orders

  • The application for rescission of judgment is dismissed.
  • The applicants are to pay the costs of the respondent on an attorney and own client scale, including the costs of senior counsel, jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.