Liberty Group Limited and Others v Le Looks Hair and Beauty Parlour CC t/a Le Looks Hair and Beauty and Another (031742/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 654 (3 July 2024)

Liberty Group Limited and Others v Le Looks Hair and Beauty Parlour CC t/a Le Looks Hair and Beauty and Another (031742/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 654 (3 July 2024)

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a clear and technically correct claim for summary judgment. The pleadings did not adequately identify the parties or the basis for representation, and it was unclear whether the plaintiffs were claiming jointly or severally. Liberty Two Degrees was not shown to be a legal entity with locus standi, which undermined the claim. The suspensive condition in the lease addendum was not pleaded or shown to be fulfilled, and the quantum claimed was presented as a globular amount without sufficient particularity. The deponent to the summary judgment affidavit did not establish his competence to verify the cause of action for all plaintiffs....

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 654
Parties
Plaintiff: Liberty Group Limited; Plaintiff: Liberty Two Degrees; Plaintiff: Pareto Limited; Defendant: Le Looks Hair and Beauty Parlour CC t/a Le Looks Hair and Beauty; Defendant: Menzi Beryl Kunene
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 July 2024
Case Number
031742/2023
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Application for Summary Judgment Under Rule 32
Outcome
Summary judgment application dismissed; defendants granted leave to defend; costs reserved for trial.
Judges
A Mtembu
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Lease Agreement, Locus Standi, Condition Precedent, Pleading Requirements
Civil Procedure Land and Property Summary Judgment Lease Agreement Locus Standi Condition Precedent Pleading Requirements

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

Parties

Liberty Group Limited

Plaintiff

Liberty Two Degrees

Plaintiff

Pareto Limited

Plaintiff

Le Looks Hair and Beauty Parlour CC t/a Le Looks Hair and Beauty

Defendant

Menzi Beryl Kunene

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Application for Summary Judgment Under Rule 32

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a clear and technically correct claim for summary judgment.
  2. 2 Whether Liberty Two Degrees has locus standi to sue and be sued.
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings sufficiently identify the parties and the basis for representation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a clear and technically correct claim for summary judgment. The pleadings did not adequately identify the parties or the basis for representation, and it was unclear whether the plaintiffs were claiming jointly or severally. Liberty Two Degrees was not shown to be a legal entity with locus standi, which undermined the claim. The suspensive condition in the lease addendum was not pleaded or shown to be fulfilled, and the quantum claimed was presented as a globular amount without sufficient particularity. The deponent to the summary judgment affidavit did not establish his competence to verify the cause of action for all plaintiffs....

Court Disposition

Summary judgment application dismissed; defendants granted leave to defend; costs reserved for trial.

Orders

  • The application for summary judgment is dismissed.
  • The defendants are granted leave to defend this action.