Holden v Assmang Limited (6488/12) [2018] ZAKZDHC 2 (8 February 2018)

Holden v Assmang Limited (6488/12) [2018] ZAKZDHC 2 (8 February 2018)

The court found that the cause of action arose from the engagement of the plaintiff by the defendant to render professional services at Cato Ridge, within the jurisdiction of the Kwazulu-Natal High Court. The subsequent complaint to the HPCSA, although prepared and lodged outside the jurisdiction, was premised on dissatisfaction with services rendered at Cato Ridge. The court held that jurisdiction is established where material elements of the delict occurred within its area. On prescription, the court determined that the plaintiff's claim, premised on malicious prosecution, accrued only when the HPCSA notified her on 30 October 2009 that no further action would be taken. The summons was...

Citation
[2018] ZAKZDHC 2
Parties
Plaintiff: Linda Holden; Defendant: Assmang Limited
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 February 2018
Case Number
6488/12
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Special Pleas of Jurisdiction and Prescription Determined Separately From Merits
Outcome
Defendant's special pleas of jurisdiction and prescription dismissed. Costs awarded to plaintiff.
Judges
Henriques
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Actio Iniuriarum, Jurisdiction of High Court, Prescription Act, Professional Discipline
Delict Civil Procedure Malicious Prosecution Actio Iniuriarum Jurisdiction of High Court Prescription Act Professional Discipline

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Linda Holden

Plaintiff

Assmang Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Special Pleas of Jurisdiction and Prescription Determined Separately From Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Kwazulu-Natal High Court has jurisdiction over the defendant and the cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's claim has prescribed under the Prescription Act 68 of 1969.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's claim is properly characterised as malicious prosecution or actio iniuriarum and when prescription commenced.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the cause of action arose from the engagement of the plaintiff by the defendant to render professional services at Cato Ridge, within the jurisdiction of the Kwazulu-Natal High Court. The subsequent complaint to the HPCSA, although prepared and lodged outside the jurisdiction, was premised on dissatisfaction with services rendered at Cato Ridge. The court held that jurisdiction is established where material elements of the delict occurred within its area. On prescription, the court determined that the plaintiff's claim, premised on malicious prosecution, accrued only when the HPCSA notified her on 30 October 2009 that no further action would be taken. The summons was...

Court Disposition

Defendant's special pleas of jurisdiction and prescription dismissed. Costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • The defendant’s special plea of jurisdiction is dismissed.
  • The defendant’s special plea of prescription is dismissed.