M-B.F.M v H.P.N.P (5182/2022P) [2024] ZAKZPHC 8 (8 February 2024)

M-B.F.M v H.P.N.P (5182/2022P) [2024] ZAKZPHC 8 (8 February 2024)

The court found that the amended particulars of claim adequately pleaded the essential elements of a universal partnership, including the profit motive, which need not be purely financial. The particulars provided sufficient detail for the defendant to plead, and the objections regarding vagueness and embarrassment were without merit. The late-raised objection regarding profit was dismissed as meritless. The issue of non-joinder was not properly raised in the notice of objection and, in any event, did not render the particulars excipiable, as the entities referenced did not have a direct and substantial interest in the relief sought. The court also addressed the plaintiff's counsel's...

Citation
[2024] ZAKZPHC 8
Parties
Applicant: M-B.F.M; Respondent: H.P.N.P
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 February 2024
Case Number
5182/2022P
Procedural Posture
Amendment Application / Application for Amendment of Particulars of Claim Prior to Plea
Outcome
Leave to amend granted; costs awarded to plaintiff except for two-thirds of counsel's heads of argument costs, which are disallowed.
Judges
Pitman
Legal Topics
Universal Partnership, Amendment of Pleadings, Non Joinder, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Punitive Costs
Civil Procedure Family and Children Universal Partnership Amendment of Pleadings Non Joinder Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Punitive Costs

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M-B.F.M

Applicant

H.P.N.P

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Amendment Application / Application for Amendment of Particulars of Claim Prior to Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendment to the particulars of claim should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the amended particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing or excipiable.
  3. 3 Whether the essential elements of a universal partnership, including profit motive, are adequately pleaded.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the amended particulars of claim adequately pleaded the essential elements of a universal partnership, including the profit motive, which need not be purely financial. The particulars provided sufficient detail for the defendant to plead, and the objections regarding vagueness and embarrassment were without merit. The late-raised objection regarding profit was dismissed as meritless. The issue of non-joinder was not properly raised in the notice of objection and, in any event, did not render the particulars excipiable, as the entities referenced did not have a direct and substantial interest in the relief sought. The court also addressed the plaintiff's counsel's...

Court Disposition

Leave to amend granted; costs awarded to plaintiff except for two-thirds of counsel's heads of argument costs, which are disallowed.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is granted leave to amend her particulars of claim in accordance with the notice dated 16 May 2023.
  • The plaintiff must deliver her amended particulars of claim within 5 days of this order.