Hagemann N.O. v Hagemann N.O. and Others (1427/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 129 (10 August 2017)

Hagemann N.O. v Hagemann N.O. and Others (1427/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 129 (10 August 2017)

The court found that the third defendant, as trustee, presented a defence that, if proven at trial, would constitute a good defence to the plaintiff's claim. Specifically, he denied the existence of any loan agreement or resolution by the trustees to borrow money from the plaintiff, and asserted that no funds were received into the Trust's account. The plaintiff's case was not unanswerable, and summary judgment is inappropriate where a bona fide defence is raised. Accordingly, the application for summary judgment was dismissed and the defendants were granted leave to defend the action.

Citation
[2017] ZAFSHC 129
Parties
Plaintiff: Johanna-Marie Hagemann; Defendant: Reinhard Hagemann N.O.; Defendant: Helena Magdalene Hagemann; Defendant: Charles Lewis Horatio Vertue
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 August 2017
Case Number
1427/2017
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment Following Notice of Intention to Defend
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed; defendants granted leave to defend; costs to stand over.
Judges
C Reinders
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Oral Loan Agreement, Trustee Liability, Defence in Summary Judgment
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Summary Judgment Oral Loan Agreement Trustee Liability Defence in Summary Judgment

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

Parties

Johanna-Marie Hagemann

Plaintiff

Reinhard Hagemann N.O.

Defendant

Helena Magdalene Hagemann

Defendant

Charles Lewis Horatio Vertue

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment Following Notice of Intention to Defend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants, as trustees of the Hagemann Trust, are liable to repay amounts allegedly loaned by the plaintiff under oral agreements.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants have raised a bona fide defence sufficient to defeat summary judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the third defendant, as trustee, presented a defence that, if proven at trial, would constitute a good defence to the plaintiff's claim. Specifically, he denied the existence of any loan agreement or resolution by the trustees to borrow money from the plaintiff, and asserted that no funds were received into the Trust's account. The plaintiff's case was not unanswerable, and summary judgment is inappropriate where a bona fide defence is raised. Accordingly, the application for summary judgment was dismissed and the defendants were granted leave to defend the action.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed; defendants granted leave to defend; costs to stand over.

Orders

  • The application for summary judgment is dismissed.
  • Leave is granted to the defendants to defend the action.