Makhanya v The Member of the Executive Council for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government (46318/2018) [2021] ZAGPJHC 669 (16 August 2021)

Makhanya v The Member of the Executive Council for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government (46318/2018) [2021] ZAGPJHC 669 (16 August 2021)

The court found that the defendant's plea failed to define the issues between the parties and did not state the defendant's case with precision. The plea contained mutually destructive and contradictory allegations regarding the plaintiff's admission and the death of her child, which were not pleaded in the alternative. The defendant referenced statutes without providing particulars, preventing the plaintiff from knowing the case she had to meet. The defendant did not properly plead to the oral agreement alleged by the plaintiff. These deficiencies rendered the plea vague and embarrassing, causing prejudice to the plaintiff. The court held that the plea was excipiable on every reasonable...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPJHC 669
Parties
Plaintiff: Makhanya Gugulethu; Defendant: The Member of the Executive Council for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 August 2021
Case Number
46318/2018
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Defendant's Plea; Interlocutory Stage Before Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's exception upheld; defendant's plea set aside; leave granted to amend plea; costs awarded to plaintiff on High Court scale.
Judges
MMP Mdalana-Mayisela
Legal Topics
Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Rule 22 Uniform Rules, Rule 18 Uniform Rules, Vicarious Liability, Statutory Compliance, Oral Agreement
Civil Procedure Delict Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Rule 22 Uniform Rules Rule 18 Uniform Rules Vicarious Liability Statutory Compliance Oral Agreement

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

Parties

Makhanya Gugulethu

Plaintiff

The Member of the Executive Council for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Defendant's Plea; Interlocutory Stage Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's plea is vague and embarrassing and/or lacks sufficient averments to sustain a defence.
  2. 2 Whether the plea fails to comply with Rule 22(2) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  3. 3 Whether contradictory allegations in the plea prejudice the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's plea failed to define the issues between the parties and did not state the defendant's case with precision. The plea contained mutually destructive and contradictory allegations regarding the plaintiff's admission and the death of her child, which were not pleaded in the alternative. The defendant referenced statutes without providing particulars, preventing the plaintiff from knowing the case she had to meet. The defendant did not properly plead to the oral agreement alleged by the plaintiff. These deficiencies rendered the plea vague and embarrassing, causing prejudice to the plaintiff. The court held that the plea was excipiable on every reasonable...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's exception upheld; defendant's plea set aside; leave granted to amend plea; costs awarded to plaintiff on High Court scale.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's exception against the defendant's plea is upheld.
  • The defendant's plea is set aside.