Kretschmer v Broll Property Management (Edms) BPK and Another In re: Kretschmer v Broll Property Management (Edms) 3PK (38798/2006) [2010] ZAGPPHC 76 (30 July 2010)

Kretschmer v Broll Property Management (Edms) BPK and Another In re: Kretschmer v Broll Property Management (Edms) 3PK (38798/2006) [2010] ZAGPPHC 76 (30 July 2010)

The court held that the application for joinder should succeed. The issue of prescription is not common cause and should not be determined at the interlocutory stage of joinder, but rather by way of special plea in the main proceedings. The applicant has demonstrated a triable issue deserving of consideration, and joinder is appropriate for convenience and fairness. The respondents' opposition based on prescription is premature and should be raised in the main action.

Citation
[2010] ZAGPPHC 76
Parties
Applicant: Veronica Kretschmer; Respondent: Broll Property Management (Edms) BPK; Respondent: Akhona-Broll Properties (Edms) BPK
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 July 2010
Case Number
38798/2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Joinder of Second Respondent as Second Defendant in Main Action.
Outcome
Application for joinder granted.
Judges
Goodey
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Prescription, Amendment of Pleadings
Civil Procedure Joinder of Parties Prescription Amendment of Pleadings

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veronica Kretschmer

Applicant

Broll Property Management (Edms) BPK

Respondent

Akhona-Broll Properties (Edms) BPK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Joinder of Second Respondent as Second Defendant in Main Action.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second respondent should be joined as a second defendant in the main action.
  2. 2 Whether the claim against the second respondent has prescribed and if this should prevent joinder.
  3. 3 Whether prescription should be determined at the joinder stage or by way of special plea in the main proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application for joinder should succeed. The issue of prescription is not common cause and should not be determined at the interlocutory stage of joinder, but rather by way of special plea in the main proceedings. The applicant has demonstrated a triable issue deserving of consideration, and joinder is appropriate for convenience and fairness. The respondents' opposition based on prescription is premature and should be raised in the main action.

Court Disposition

Application for joinder granted.

Orders

  • Prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion are granted.