Cronje and Others v Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank (3955/2019) [2025] ZAFSHC 86 (5 March 2025)

Cronje and Others v Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank (3955/2019) [2025] ZAFSHC 86 (5 March 2025)

The court found that the plaintiff had adequately replied to the defendants' request for further particulars and that the nature of the particulars sought by the defendants were matters of evidence, not strictly necessary for trial preparation. The court exercised its discretion and determined that the defendants were not prejudiced by the plaintiff's conduct. Requests relating to discovery documents were governed by Rule 35 and did not warrant further particulars under Rule 21. The application to compel further particulars was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the defendants on Scale C as per rule 67A.

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 86
Parties
Applicant: Philippus Johannes Jacobus Cronje; Applicant: Adolf Johannes de Bruyn N.O.; Applicant: Philippus Johannes Jacobus Cronje N.O.; Applicant: Cecile Cronje N.O.; Applicant: Andries Gustav Le Grange N.O.; Applicant: Die Cronje Seuns Boerdery CC; Applicant: Hendrik Bernardus Cronje N.O.; Applicant: Hester Cronje N.O.; Respondent: Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2025
Case Number
3955/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Compel Further Particulars Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs awarded against defendants on Scale C.
Judges
Mpama
Legal Topics
Uniform Rules of Court Rule 21, National Credit Act, Reckless Lending, Affordability Assessment, Suretyship, Mortgage Bond Enforcement
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Uniform Rules of Court Rule 21 National Credit Act Reckless Lending Affordability Assessment Suretyship Mortgage Bond Enforcement

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philippus Johannes Jacobus Cronje

Applicant

Adolf Johannes de Bruyn N.O.

Applicant

Philippus Johannes Jacobus Cronje N.O.

Applicant

Cecile Cronje N.O.

Applicant

Andries Gustav Le Grange N.O.

Applicant

Die Cronje Seuns Boerdery CC

Applicant

Hendrik Bernardus Cronje N.O.

Applicant

Hester Cronje N.O.

Applicant

Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Compel Further Particulars Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to further and better particulars from the plaintiff for trial preparation.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars requested are strictly necessary for the purposes of trial under Rule 21 of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has adequately replied to the defendants' request for further particulars.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had adequately replied to the defendants' request for further particulars and that the nature of the particulars sought by the defendants were matters of evidence, not strictly necessary for trial preparation. The court exercised its discretion and determined that the defendants were not prejudiced by the plaintiff's conduct. Requests relating to discovery documents were governed by Rule 35 and did not warrant further particulars under Rule 21. The application to compel further particulars was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the defendants on Scale C as per rule 67A.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs awarded against defendants on Scale C.

Orders

  • The application to compel the plaintiff to provide further particulars is dismissed.
  • The defendants are ordered to pay costs on Scale C as contemplated in rule 67A of the Uniform Rules of the Court, jointly and severally, one paying the other to be absolved.