Lebotsi Renovations and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd and Another v Vrey and Others (2024-005583) [2025] ZAGPPHC 70 (20 January 2025)

Lebotsi Renovations and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd and Another v Vrey and Others (2024-005583) [2025] ZAGPPHC 70 (20 January 2025)

The court found that the amended particulars of claim provide sufficient clarity regarding the issues relied upon by the plaintiffs. The particulars are not excipiable as they allow the defendants to understand the material facts and respond appropriately. Issues such as non-joinder and the applicability of the Alienation of Land Act are not grounds for exception but should be raised by way of dilatory or special pleas. The defendants will not be prejudiced if the exception is dismissed, as they can request further particulars or plead to the averments. The general principle that costs follow success applies, and the matter does not warrant a higher costs order.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 70
Parties
Defendant: Lebotsi Renovations and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Elizabeth Adriana Bruwer; Plaintiff: Helgard Michael Vrey; Plaintiff: Annet Very; Plaintiff: Elgard Vrey NO
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 January 2025
Case Number
2024-005583
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Exception to Pleadings, Cause of Action, Non Variation Clause, Oral and Written Contracts, Non Joinder, Alienation of Land Act
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Exception to Pleadings Cause of Action Non Variation Clause Oral and Written Contracts Non Joinder Alienation of Land Act

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lebotsi Renovations and Projects Management (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Elizabeth Adriana Bruwer

Defendant

Helgard Michael Vrey

Plaintiff

Annet Very

Plaintiff

Elgard Vrey NO

Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended particulars of claim disclose a cause of action against the defendants.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing.
  3. 3 Whether the non-joinder of Serve Investments One Two Three (Proprietary) Ltd is properly raised by way of exception.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the amended particulars of claim provide sufficient clarity regarding the issues relied upon by the plaintiffs. The particulars are not excipiable as they allow the defendants to understand the material facts and respond appropriately. Issues such as non-joinder and the applicability of the Alienation of Land Act are not grounds for exception but should be raised by way of dilatory or special pleas. The defendants will not be prejudiced if the exception is dismissed, as they can request further particulars or plead to the averments. The general principle that costs follow success applies, and the matter does not warrant a higher costs order.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs, such costs on Scale B.