Lovell v Lovell and Another (24583/2009) [2022] ZAGPPHC 711 (22 September 2022)

Lovell v Lovell and Another (24583/2009) [2022] ZAGPPHC 711 (22 September 2022)

The court found that the defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim should be condoned, as the parties had agreed to allow the court to decide condonation and the amendment was necessary to address issues raised by the plaintiff. The exceptions raised by the plaintiff were dismissed, as the defendant's counterclaim disclosed a cause of action for declaratory relief regarding the accrual calculation, and was sufficiently clear to allow the plaintiff to plead. The court held that the relief sought did not require joinder of the trustees or Investec, as the defendant was not claiming the assets themselves but seeking that the amounts donated and invested be considered in the accrual...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 711
Parties
Plaintiff: Kevin Stanhope Lovell; Defendant: Angela Lovell; Respondent: Fairbridge Wertheim Becker Attorneys Incorporated
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 September 2022
Case Number
24583/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Interlocutory Applications: Condonation, Exception, and Anti Dissipation Application in Divorce Accrual Dispute
Outcome
The defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim is condoned; the plaintiff's exception is dismissed with costs; the anti-dissipation application is granted; costs of the anti-dissipation application are costs in the cause.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Accrual System, Anti Dissipation Interdict, Exception Procedure, Matrimonial Property Act, Declaratory Relief
Family and Children Civil Procedure Accrual System Anti Dissipation Interdict Exception Procedure Matrimonial Property Act Declaratory Relief

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Stanhope Lovell

Plaintiff

Angela Lovell

Defendant

Fairbridge Wertheim Becker Attorneys Incorporated

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Interlocutory Applications: Condonation, Exception, and Anti Dissipation Application in Divorce Accrual Dispute

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim should be condoned.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's exception to the defendant's amended counterclaim should be upheld.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's counterclaim discloses a cause of action and is sufficiently clear to allow the plaintiff to plead.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim should be condoned, as the parties had agreed to allow the court to decide condonation and the amendment was necessary to address issues raised by the plaintiff. The exceptions raised by the plaintiff were dismissed, as the defendant's counterclaim disclosed a cause of action for declaratory relief regarding the accrual calculation, and was sufficiently clear to allow the plaintiff to plead. The court held that the relief sought did not require joinder of the trustees or Investec, as the defendant was not claiming the assets themselves but seeking that the amounts donated and invested be considered in the accrual...

Court Disposition

The defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim is condoned; the plaintiff's exception is dismissed with costs; the anti-dissipation application is granted; costs of the anti-dissipation application are costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The defendant's late amendment of her counterclaim is condoned.
  • The issue of costs associated with the amendment of the plea and counterclaim remains to be dealt with at the main hearing.