Giant Leap Workspace Specialists (Pty) Ltd v Scoin Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a The South African Gold Coin Exchange (2014/37464) [2016] ZAGPJHC 321 (23 November 2016)

Giant Leap Workspace Specialists (Pty) Ltd v Scoin Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a The South African Gold Coin Exchange (2014/37464) [2016] ZAGPJHC 321 (23 November 2016)

The court held that the interpretation advanced by the defendant regarding the non-variation clause is not the only possible interpretation. The clause anticipates amplification of the agreement, and it is plausible that a new contract could be concluded without strict compliance with the non-variation clause. The validity of the second contract, being partly written and partly oral, is not so remote as to be implausible and should be determined at trial. Regarding the alleged vagueness and embarrassment, the court found that the pleadings, read as a whole and with a common-sense approach, are sufficiently clear for the defendant to know the case it must meet. Any lack of itemisation or...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPJHC 321
Parties
Plaintiff: Giant Leap Workspace Specialists (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Scoin Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a The South African Gold Coin Exchange
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 November 2016
Case Number
2014/37464
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Interlocutory
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
M Olivier
Legal Topics
Exception to Particulars of Claim, Non Variation Clause, Contractual Amendment, Quantum of Claim, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Giant Leap Workspace Specialists (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Scoin Trading (Pty) Ltd t/a The South African Gold Coin Exchange

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Interlocutory

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's particulars of claim disclose a cause of action in light of the non-variation clause.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing due to lack of itemisation of deductions.
  3. 3 Whether the second contract, partly written and partly oral, is valid despite not being signed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the interpretation advanced by the defendant regarding the non-variation clause is not the only possible interpretation. The clause anticipates amplification of the agreement, and it is plausible that a new contract could be concluded without strict compliance with the non-variation clause. The validity of the second contract, being partly written and partly oral, is not so remote as to be implausible and should be determined at trial. Regarding the alleged vagueness and embarrassment, the court found that the pleadings, read as a whole and with a common-sense approach, are sufficiently clear for the defendant to know the case it must meet. Any lack of itemisation or...

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs.