Griessel and Another v De Kock N.O and Others (79315/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 540 (30 May 2025)

Griessel and Another v De Kock N.O and Others (79315/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 540 (30 May 2025)

The court found that the second plaintiff had already discovered all relevant documents in his possession, including proof of payments and supporting financial records. The requests for further discovery by the defendants, specifically those in prayers 1.7 and 1.19 to 1.21, were not justified as the documents sought were either not in existence, not in the respondent's possession, or irrelevant to the issues in dispute. The application to compel further discovery was deemed a fishing expedition and an abuse of process intended to delay proceedings. Consequently, the application was dismissed with a punitive costs order on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 540
Parties
Plaintiff: Joan Cynthia Griessel; Plaintiff: Herold Lee De Kock; Defendant: De Villebois Etienne De Kock N.O.; Defendant: Shirley Ann Van Wyk N.O.; Defendant: Celeste Mari Dovey N.O.; Defendant: Frederik Frans Van Niekerk N.O.; Defendant: Johannes Jurgens Potgieter N.O.; Defendant: De Villebois Etienne De Kock; Defendant: Shirley Ann Van Wyk; Defendant: Celeste Mari Dovey; Defendant: Master of the High Court, Pretoria; Defendant: Manyeleti (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 May 2025
Case Number
79315/23
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Compel Discovery Under Rule 35(7)
Outcome
Application to compel further discovery dismissed with costs on attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
JF Grobler
Legal Topics
Discovery Procedure, Rule 35 Application, Costs Order, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Discovery Procedure Rule 35 Application Costs Order Abuse of Process

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joan Cynthia Griessel

Plaintiff

Herold Lee De Kock

Plaintiff

De Villebois Etienne De Kock N.O.

Defendant

Shirley Ann Van Wyk N.O.

Defendant

Celeste Mari Dovey N.O.

Defendant

Frederik Frans Van Niekerk N.O.

Defendant

Johannes Jurgens Potgieter N.O.

Defendant

De Villebois Etienne De Kock

Defendant

Shirley Ann Van Wyk

Defendant

Celeste Mari Dovey

Defendant

Master of the High Court, Pretoria

Defendant

Manyeleti (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Compel Discovery Under Rule 35(7)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to further discovery of documents listed in prayers 1.7 and 1.19 to 1.21 of the notice of motion.
  2. 2 Whether the documents requested are relevant to the issues in dispute.
  3. 3 Whether the application to compel further discovery constitutes an abuse of process warranting a punitive costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second plaintiff had already discovered all relevant documents in his possession, including proof of payments and supporting financial records. The requests for further discovery by the defendants, specifically those in prayers 1.7 and 1.19 to 1.21, were not justified as the documents sought were either not in existence, not in the respondent's possession, or irrelevant to the issues in dispute. The application to compel further discovery was deemed a fishing expedition and an abuse of process intended to delay proceedings. Consequently, the application was dismissed with a punitive costs order on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel.

Court Disposition

Application to compel further discovery dismissed with costs on attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs on attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel.