Khourie v Levine and Others (95/06622) [2018] ZAGPJHC 418 (6 June 2018)

Khourie v Levine and Others (95/06622) [2018] ZAGPJHC 418 (6 June 2018)

The court held that the proposed amendment to the particulars of claim failed to meet the required standard of particularity for complex damages cases. While the documents G1 and G2 provided a breakdown of income and liabilities, they did not set out the essential facts and assumptions underlying the quantification of damages. This omission rendered the amendment vague and embarrassing, preventing the respondents from meaningfully assessing and pleading to the claim. The court emphasized that in complex damages litigation, pleadings must go beyond stating the amounts claimed and must disclose the factual and conceptual basis for those amounts. Accordingly, the application to amend was...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPJHC 418
Parties
Applicant: Paul Joseph Khourie; Respondent: Alfred Levine; Respondent: Township Realtors (SA) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Willem J Steyn
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2018
Case Number
95/06622
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application to amend dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
David Unterhalter
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Quantification of Damages, Loss of Profits, Pleading Particularity, Breach of Contract, Complex Damages
Civil Procedure Delict Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Quantification of Damages Loss of Profits Pleading Particularity Breach of Contract +1 more

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Joseph Khourie

Applicant

Alfred Levine

Respondent

Township Realtors (SA) (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Willem J Steyn

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be permitted to amend his particulars of claim to revise the quantification of damages.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendment provides sufficient particularity for the respondents to plead.
  3. 3 Whether the amendment is vague and embarrassing and thus excipiable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the proposed amendment to the particulars of claim failed to meet the required standard of particularity for complex damages cases. While the documents G1 and G2 provided a breakdown of income and liabilities, they did not set out the essential facts and assumptions underlying the quantification of damages. This omission rendered the amendment vague and embarrassing, preventing the respondents from meaningfully assessing and pleading to the claim. The court emphasized that in complex damages litigation, pleadings must go beyond stating the amounts claimed and must disclose the factual and conceptual basis for those amounts. Accordingly, the application to amend was...

Court Disposition

Application to amend dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application to amend dated 24 March 2011 is dismissed with costs, the costs to include the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.
  • The matter is to be made subject to judicial case management.