Liberty Group Limited and Others v S Surtee Esquire (Pty) Ltd t/a Grays and Others (003603/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 751 (31 August 2023)

Liberty Group Limited and Others v S Surtee Esquire (Pty) Ltd t/a Grays and Others (003603/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 751 (31 August 2023)

The applicants failed to comply with the peremptory requirements of Rule 32(2) and (3) by not verifying the cause of action, the amount claimed, and by not attaching the relevant annexures to the particulars of claim. The respondents raised bona fide triable issues regarding the validity of the suretyship agreements and the quantum of the claim. The court found that the applicants did not make out an unanswerable case and that the respondents are entitled to have these issues properly ventilated at trial. Summary judgment is a stringent remedy requiring strict compliance with procedural rules, which was not met in this case.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 751
Parties
Applicant: Liberty Group Limited; Applicant: 2 Degrees Properties (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Pareto Limited; Respondent: S Surtee Esquire (Pty) Ltd t/a Grays; Respondent: Soyab Suliman Surtee; Respondent: Shahed Surtee
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 August 2023
Case Number
003603/2023
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed with costs.
Judges
T Bokako
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Suretyship, Lease Agreement, Rule 32, Business Rescue, Quantum of Damages
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Summary Judgment Suretyship Lease Agreement Rule 32 Business Rescue Quantum of Damages

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liberty Group Limited

Applicant

2 Degrees Properties (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Pareto Limited

Applicant

S Surtee Esquire (Pty) Ltd t/a Grays

Respondent

Soyab Suliman Surtee

Respondent

Shahed Surtee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have complied with Rule 32(2) and (3) in their application for summary judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents have raised a bona fide defence to the applicants' claim.
  3. 3 Whether the validity of the suretyship agreements and the quantum of the amount claimed have been properly verified by the applicants.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to comply with the peremptory requirements of Rule 32(2) and (3) by not verifying the cause of action, the amount claimed, and by not attaching the relevant annexures to the particulars of claim. The respondents raised bona fide triable issues regarding the validity of the suretyship agreements and the quantum of the claim. The court found that the applicants did not make out an unanswerable case and that the respondents are entitled to have these issues properly ventilated at trial. Summary judgment is a stringent remedy requiring strict compliance with procedural rules, which was not met in this case.

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.