Intense Heat Investments v VTC Africa Developments (09978/2007) [2015] ZAGPJHC 339 (12 November 2015)

Intense Heat Investments v VTC Africa Developments (09978/2007) [2015] ZAGPJHC 339 (12 November 2015)

The court found that the amendment sought by the applicant introduced a new cause of action for loss of profits arising from the economic meltdown, which was not pleaded in the original particulars of claim. The facts underlying the new claim were not present in the original claim, and the right of action was not substantially the same. As the cause of action for the new claim arose by May 2006, and the amendment was only sought in October 2013, the claim had prescribed in terms of the Prescription Act. The amendment was therefore dismissed on the basis of prescription, and there was no need to consider the other objections raised by the respondent.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 339
Parties
Applicant: Intense Heat Investments; Respondent: VTC Africa Developments
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2015
Case Number
09978/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Amendment of Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application for amendment dismissed with costs.
Judges
M Victor
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Prescription Act, Loss of Profits, Special Damages
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Prescription Act Loss of Profits Special Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intense Heat Investments

Applicant

VTC Africa Developments

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Amendment of Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment to the particulars of claim introduces a new cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the new claim for loss of profits has prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  3. 3 Whether the amendment merely amplifies the original special damages claim or constitutes a distinct claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the amendment sought by the applicant introduced a new cause of action for loss of profits arising from the economic meltdown, which was not pleaded in the original particulars of claim. The facts underlying the new claim were not present in the original claim, and the right of action was not substantially the same. As the cause of action for the new claim arose by May 2006, and the amendment was only sought in October 2013, the claim had prescribed in terms of the Prescription Act. The amendment was therefore dismissed on the basis of prescription, and there was no need to consider the other objections raised by the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for amendment dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for amendment is dismissed with costs.