Jugwanth v Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd (529/2020) [2021] ZASCA 114; [2021] 4 All SA 346 (SCA) (9 September 2021)

Jugwanth v Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd (529/2020) [2021] ZASCA 114; [2021] 4 All SA 346 (SCA) (9 September 2021)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the particulars of claim disclosed a cause of action and that prescription must be invoked and proved by the defendant. The plaintiff is not required to plead facts in anticipation of a possible plea of prescription. The delivery of an exception does not shift the burden to the plaintiff to amend the particulars of claim to defeat prescription. Prescription is fact-driven and may be delayed or interrupted by statutory provisions, and the onus remains on the defendant to prove prescription. The exception was incorrectly upheld by the High Court, and the appeal succeeded. The order of the High Court was set aside and substituted with an order dismissing...

Citation
[2021] ZASCA 114
Parties
Appellant: Sunnidhew Sookai Jugwanth; Respondent: Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 September 2021
Case Number
529/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg
Outcome
Appeal upheld; exception dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Navsa, Gorven, Hughes, Kgoele, Phatshoane
Legal Topics
Exception to Particulars of Claim, Extinctive Prescription, Prescription Act, Special Plea, Burden of Proof
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Exception to Particulars of Claim Extinctive Prescription Prescription Act Special Plea Burden of Proof

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunnidhew Sookai Jugwanth

Appellant

Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim failed to disclose a cause of action due to prescription of the debt.
  2. 2 Whether a plaintiff is required to plead facts to defeat a possible plea of prescription in the particulars of claim.
  3. 3 Whether an exception based on prescription can succeed where prescription must be invoked and proved by the defendant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the particulars of claim disclosed a cause of action and that prescription must be invoked and proved by the defendant. The plaintiff is not required to plead facts in anticipation of a possible plea of prescription. The delivery of an exception does not shift the burden to the plaintiff to amend the particulars of claim to defeat prescription. Prescription is fact-driven and may be delayed or interrupted by statutory provisions, and the onus remains on the defendant to prove prescription. The exception was incorrectly upheld by the High Court, and the appeal succeeded. The order of the High Court was set aside and substituted with an order dismissing...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; exception dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel wherever so employed.
  • The order of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg, is set aside and substituted with an order dismissing the exception with costs.