Desmarais v De Villiers (40271/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 184 (19 May 2017)

Desmarais v De Villiers (40271/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 184 (19 May 2017)

The court found that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim relied on documents that did not comply with the statutory requirements for the alienation of land, as annexure 'GJCD3' was not signed by both parties. The sale agreement and its addenda, as pleaded, did not establish a valid cause of action for the claimed purchase price of R1,4 million. The particulars of claim were also vague and embarrassing because they failed to clarify the calculation of the amounts claimed and did not address whether the mortgage bond condition was fulfilled. The court upheld the defendant's exceptions on these grounds and granted the plaintiff leave to amend the particulars of claim.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 184
Parties
Applicant: G J C Desmarais; Respondent: M De Villiers
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 May 2017
Case Number
40271/16
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Exception / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Defendant's exceptions upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim.
Judges
J W Louw
Legal Topics
Alienation of Land Act, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Contractual Variation, Mortgage Bond Condition
Land and Property Civil Procedure Alienation of Land Act Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Contractual Variation Mortgage Bond Condition

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

Parties

G J C Desmarais

Applicant

M De Villiers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Exception / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim disclose a valid cause of action for the alleged purchase price of R1,4 million.
  2. 2 Whether the addenda to the sale agreement comply with section 2 of the Alienation of Land Act and the written contract variation clause.
  3. 3 Whether the particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing due to calculation and pleading deficiencies.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim relied on documents that did not comply with the statutory requirements for the alienation of land, as annexure 'GJCD3' was not signed by both parties. The sale agreement and its addenda, as pleaded, did not establish a valid cause of action for the claimed purchase price of R1,4 million. The particulars of claim were also vague and embarrassing because they failed to clarify the calculation of the amounts claimed and did not address whether the mortgage bond condition was fulfilled. The court upheld the defendant's exceptions on these grounds and granted the plaintiff leave to amend the particulars of claim.

Court Disposition

Defendant's exceptions upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim.

Orders

  • The defendant's second exception (excluding reference to Rule 18(6)), third exception, and fifth exception that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing are upheld with costs.
  • Leave is granted to the plaintiff to amend his particulars of claim within 10 days of the date of this order.