Kaykaysim Projects (Pty) Ltd v Dihlabeng Local Municipality (1355/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 16 (23 January 2025)

Kaykaysim Projects (Pty) Ltd v Dihlabeng Local Municipality (1355/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 16 (23 January 2025)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to plead the necessary material facts and terms of the contract that would entitle it to payment of the retention money claimed. Specifically, the plaintiff did not annex the 'Contract Data', did not plead the quantum or percentage of retention money, and did not demonstrate how the claim amount was calculated. The documents relied upon did not establish a contract for the specific project at the stated value, nor did they show entitlement to retention money. As a result, the particulars of claim did not sustain a cause of action for specific performance. The exception was upheld, but the plaintiff was granted leave to amend its particulars of...

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 16
Parties
Plaintiff: Kaykaysim Projects (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Dihlabeng Local Municipality
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Case Number
1355/2024
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Interlocutory
Outcome
Exception upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim; costs awarded against plaintiff.
Judges
Greyling-Coetzer AJ
Legal Topics
Exception to Pleadings, Specific Performance, Contractual Entitlement, Retention Money, Uniform Rule 18
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Exception to Pleadings Specific Performance Contractual Entitlement Retention Money Uniform Rule 18

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kaykaysim Projects (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Dihlabeng Local Municipality

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim; Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's particulars of claim disclose the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action for specific performance under contract.
  2. 2 Whether the documents relied upon by the plaintiff constitute a valid contract for the specific project and entitle it to retention money.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has pleaded sufficient material facts and annexed the necessary documents to support its claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to plead the necessary material facts and terms of the contract that would entitle it to payment of the retention money claimed. Specifically, the plaintiff did not annex the 'Contract Data', did not plead the quantum or percentage of retention money, and did not demonstrate how the claim amount was calculated. The documents relied upon did not establish a contract for the specific project at the stated value, nor did they show entitlement to retention money. As a result, the particulars of claim did not sustain a cause of action for specific performance. The exception was upheld, but the plaintiff was granted leave to amend its particulars of...

Court Disposition

Exception upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim; costs awarded against plaintiff.

Orders

  • The defendant's exception is upheld.
  • The plaintiff is granted leave to amend its particulars of claim in terms of Uniform Rule 28, within ten days of the date of this order.