Fourie N.O and Others v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (1425/2020;1426/2020;1427/2020;1428/2020) [2022] ZANCHC 20 (8 April 2022)

Fourie N.O and Others v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (1425/2020;1426/2020;1427/2020;1428/2020) [2022] ZANCHC 20 (8 April 2022)

The court found that there was substantial compliance with Rule 18(1) as the attorneys who signed the Particulars of Claim possessed the requisite rights of appearance, and any confusion was cured by explanation in the answering affidavit. However, the respondent failed to comply with Rule 18(6) by not annexing the actual written contract of cession or relevant extracts to the Particulars of Claim, which is a mandatory requirement when the contract forms a link in the chain of the cause of action. The annexed 'RECORDAL' document did not satisfy this requirement. The respondent's application for condonation under Rule 27(3) was not pursued and, in any event, lacked good cause. The...

Citation
[2022] ZANCHC 20
Parties
Applicant: Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Fourie N.O.; Applicant: Johanna Elizabeth Fourie N.O.; Applicant: Christiaan Klindt N.O.; Applicant: Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Fourie; Applicant: Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Saunderson N.O.; Applicant: Suzanne Saunderson N.O.; Applicant: Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Saunderson; Respondent: Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 April 2022
Case Number
1425/2020;1426/2020;1427/2020;1428/2020
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application Under Rule 30 for Irregular Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted in favour of the applicants; respondent directed to comply with Rule 18(6) within ten days, failing which applicants may seek further relief including striking out the pleadings. Costs awarded against the respondent.
Judges
Lever
Legal Topics
Uniform Rules of Court, Rule 18 Compliance, Irregular Proceedings, Pleading Requirements, Contract Cession
Civil Procedure Uniform Rules of Court Rule 18 Compliance Irregular Proceedings Pleading Requirements Contract Cession

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Fourie N.O.

Applicant

Johanna Elizabeth Fourie N.O.

Applicant

Christiaan Klindt N.O.

Applicant

Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Fourie

Applicant

Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Saunderson N.O.

Applicant

Suzanne Saunderson N.O.

Applicant

Jan Hendrik Gerhardus Saunderson

Applicant

Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application Under Rule 30 for Irregular Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's Particulars of Claim comply with Rule 18(1) and 18(6) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether the failure to annex the written contract of cession constitutes an irregular step under Rule 18(6).
  3. 3 Whether substantial compliance with Rule 18(1) occurred regarding the signing of pleadings by attorneys and advocates.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was substantial compliance with Rule 18(1) as the attorneys who signed the Particulars of Claim possessed the requisite rights of appearance, and any confusion was cured by explanation in the answering affidavit. However, the respondent failed to comply with Rule 18(6) by not annexing the actual written contract of cession or relevant extracts to the Particulars of Claim, which is a mandatory requirement when the contract forms a link in the chain of the cause of action. The annexed 'RECORDAL' document did not satisfy this requirement. The respondent's application for condonation under Rule 27(3) was not pursued and, in any event, lacked good cause. The...

Court Disposition

Application granted in favour of the applicants; respondent directed to comply with Rule 18(6) within ten days, failing which applicants may seek further relief including striking out the pleadings. Costs awarded against the respondent.

Orders

  • The respondent is directed, within 10 days of service of this order, to comply with Rule 18(6) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  • If the respondent fails to comply, the applicants may return to Court on the same papers, duly supplemented if required, for further relief including an order to strike out the Summons and Particulars of Claim of the Respondent.