Makhetha v SB Guaranteed Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd (17570/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 523 (23 May 2025)
The application for rescission was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish any grounds for rescission. The evidence showed that service of the summons was properly effected, and the applicant was aware of the proceedings, having attended the default judgment hearing. The applicant did not dispute her indebtedness or the arrears, nor did she provide a bona fide defence or a satisfactory explanation for the late filing of the rescission application. The respondent was entitled to enforce the mortgage bond and seek costs on an attorney and client scale as provided for in the agreement. The applicant's failure to participate in the proceedings, file a replying affidavit, or heads...
- Citation
- [2025] ZAGPPHC 523
- Parties
- Applicant: Refilwe Makhetha; Respondent: SB Guaranteed Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd; Plaintiff: SB Guaranteed Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Lebohang Makhetha; Defendant: Refilwe Makhetha
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 23 May 2025
- Case Number
- 17570/23
- Procedural Posture
- Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for rescission dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
- Judges
- SG Maritz
- Legal Topics
- Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Mortgage Bond Enforcement, Service of Process, Attorney and Client Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Refilwe Makhetha
Applicant
SB Guaranteed Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
SB Guaranteed Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd
Plaintiff
Lebohang Makhetha
Defendant
Refilwe Makhetha
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has established grounds for rescission of the default judgment granted on 11 March 2024.
- 2 Whether service of summons was properly effected on the applicant.
- 3 Whether the applicant has provided a satisfactory explanation for the late filing of the rescission application.
Ratio Decidendi
The application for rescission was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish any grounds for rescission. The evidence showed that service of the summons was properly effected, and the applicant was aware of the proceedings, having attended the default judgment hearing. The applicant did not dispute her indebtedness or the arrears, nor did she provide a bona fide defence or a satisfactory explanation for the late filing of the rescission application. The respondent was entitled to enforce the mortgage bond and seek costs on an attorney and client scale as provided for in the agreement. The applicant's failure to participate in the proceedings, file a replying affidavit, or heads...
Court Disposition
Application for rescission dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale.
Orders
- The application for rescission is dismissed.
- The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application on an attorney and client scale.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment