Joint Equity Investments in Housing (Pty) Ltd and Another v Dlamini Construction CC and Others (21508/2011) [2011] ZAGPPHC 188 (8 September 2011)

Joint Equity Investments in Housing (Pty) Ltd and Another v Dlamini Construction CC and Others (21508/2011) [2011] ZAGPPHC 188 (8 September 2011)

The court found that the defendants had disclosed sufficient grounds to justify the granting of leave to defend. There was no basis to deny them the opportunity to present their defence at trial. Accordingly, leave to defend was granted and costs were ordered to be costs in the cause.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] ZAGPPHC 188
Parties
Plaintiff: Joint Equity Investments in Housing (Pty) Ltd; Plaintiff: National Urban Reconstruction & Housing Agency (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Dlamini Construction CC; Defendant: Kenneth Dlamini; Defendant: Blackstone One - Dlamini Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Kenneth Dlamini N.O. (in his capacity as Trustee of the KBZ Family Trust)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 September 2011
Case Number
21508/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Application for Leave to Defend
Outcome
Leave to defend granted to the defendants; costs to be costs in the cause.
Judges
Goodey AJ
Legal Topics
Leave to Defend, Costs in the Cause
Civil Procedure Leave to Defend Costs in the Cause

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joint Equity Investments in Housing (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

National Urban Reconstruction & Housing Agency (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Dlamini Construction CC

Defendant

Kenneth Dlamini

Defendant

Blackstone One - Dlamini Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Kenneth Dlamini N.O. (in his capacity as Trustee of the KBZ Family Trust)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Application for Leave to Defend

  1. 1 Whether the defendants should be granted leave to defend the action.
  2. 2 Determination of costs in relation to the application for leave to defend.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendants had disclosed sufficient grounds to justify the granting of leave to defend. There was no basis to deny them the opportunity to present their defence at trial. Accordingly, leave to defend was granted and costs were ordered to be costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Leave to defend granted to the defendants; costs to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the Defendants to defend the action.
  • Costs are to be costs in the cause.