Jazzspirit 101 (Pty) Ltd v Cole (38801/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 348 (7 December 2012)

Jazzspirit 101 (Pty) Ltd v Cole (38801/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 348 (7 December 2012)

The court found that the defendant's exception was based on minor defects and technicalities in the plaintiff's particulars of claim, which do not prevent the defendant from pleading. The plaintiff had completed the works, and the defendant had expressed satisfaction, rendering the nature of the certificate irrelevant. The exception did not raise any substantial question of law or embarrassment that could not be cured by further particulars. The court declined to adopt an over-technical approach and dismissed the exception.

Citation
[2012] ZAGPPHC 348
Parties
Plaintiff: Jazzspirit 101 (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Miller Rory Cole
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 December 2012
Case Number
38801/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
Makgoka
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Building Contract, Quantity Surveyor Certificate
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Exception Procedure Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Building Contract Quantity Surveyor Certificate

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

Jazzspirit 101 (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Miller Rory Cole

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing or lack necessary averments to sustain a cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the document relied upon by the plaintiff qualifies as a quantity surveyor's certificate under the contract.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is able to plead to the particulars of claim despite alleged contradictions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's exception was based on minor defects and technicalities in the plaintiff's particulars of claim, which do not prevent the defendant from pleading. The plaintiff had completed the works, and the defendant had expressed satisfaction, rendering the nature of the certificate irrelevant. The exception did not raise any substantial question of law or embarrassment that could not be cured by further particulars. The court declined to adopt an over-technical approach and dismissed the exception.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The defendant's exception is dismissed with costs.