Everton Construction and Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Others v Access Bank South Africa Limited and Another (6487/2017) [2025] ZAGPJHC 501 (22 May 2025)

Everton Construction and Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Others v Access Bank South Africa Limited and Another (6487/2017) [2025] ZAGPJHC 501 (22 May 2025)

The court found that the plaintiffs bear the onus of proving several key allegations, including the content and terms of the banking agreements, the correctness of the schedules of debits, and the lack of authority for the debits. The pleadings do not establish a prima facie case entitling the plaintiffs to judgment in the absence of evidence. The plaintiffs must adduce evidence on these issues before the defendant is required to answer. The court ruled that the plaintiffs have the duty to begin adducing evidence at trial.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 501
Parties
Plaintiff: Everton Construction and Engineering (Pty) Ltd; Plaintiff: Raycal Properties Investments CC; Plaintiff: Idlewild Properties (Benoni) (Pty) Limited; Plaintiff: Raymond John Koedyk; Plaintiff: Raymond John Koedyk N.O.; Defendant: Access Bank South Africa Limited; Respondent: Tracey-Leigh McDonnell
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 May 2025
Case Number
6487/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Ruling on Duty to Begin at Trial (rule 39 Application)
Outcome
Plaintiffs directed to begin adducing evidence at trial; costs awarded against plaintiffs.
Judges
Mahalelo
Legal Topics
Duty to Begin, Burden of Proof, Banker Client Relationship, Unauthorised Debits, Contractual Terms
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Duty to Begin Burden of Proof Banker Client Relationship Unauthorised Debits Contractual Terms

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Everton Construction and Engineering (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Raycal Properties Investments CC

Plaintiff

Idlewild Properties (Benoni) (Pty) Limited

Plaintiff

Raymond John Koedyk

Plaintiff

Raymond John Koedyk N.O.

Plaintiff

Access Bank South Africa Limited

Defendant

Tracey-Leigh McDonnell

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Ruling on Duty to Begin at Trial (rule 39 Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Which party bears the duty to begin adducing evidence at trial under Rule 39 of the Uniform Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs have established a prima facie case on the pleadings requiring the defendant to begin.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs bear the onus of proving the content and terms of the banking agreements.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs bear the onus of proving several key allegations, including the content and terms of the banking agreements, the correctness of the schedules of debits, and the lack of authority for the debits. The pleadings do not establish a prima facie case entitling the plaintiffs to judgment in the absence of evidence. The plaintiffs must adduce evidence on these issues before the defendant is required to answer. The court ruled that the plaintiffs have the duty to begin adducing evidence at trial.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs directed to begin adducing evidence at trial; costs awarded against plaintiffs.

Orders

  • It is directed that the plaintiffs shall begin to adduce evidence at the trial.
  • The plaintiffs are to pay the defendant’s costs, including the costs of two counsel where so employed, jointly and severally the one paying the other to be absolved on Scale C.