Makokotlela v Khumalo and Others (100047/2015) [2020] ZAGPPHC 465 (28 February 2020)

Makokotlela v Khumalo and Others (100047/2015) [2020] ZAGPPHC 465 (28 February 2020)

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for his default in not defending the main action, as he was aware of the proceedings through communications from his attorneys and did not take steps to defend. He did not adequately explain the delay in bringing the rescission application, with significant periods unaccounted for. The applicant also failed to establish a bona fide defence, as the evidence indicated he was aware of and involved in the arrangements regarding the property and close corporation. The conflicting expert reports and the confirmatory affidavit from a police officer undermined his denial of the affidavit. The requirements for rescission under...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 465
Parties
Applicant: Lionel Makokotlela; Respondent: Amos Khumalo; Respondent: The Sheriff of the High Court Pretoria Central; Respondent: Companies and Intellectual Property Commission; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds; Respondent: Sevipix 11 CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 February 2020
Case Number
100047/2015
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment Under Rule 31(2)(b) and Common Law
Outcome
Application for rescission of default judgment and joinder dismissed with costs.
Judges
G.T. Avvakoumides
Legal Topics
Rescission of Default Judgment, Rule 31 2 B, Joinder Application, Condonation, Bona Fide Defence
Civil Procedure Rescission of Default Judgment Rule 31 2 B Joinder Application Condonation Bona Fide Defence

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lionel Makokotlela

Applicant

Amos Khumalo

Respondent

The Sheriff of the High Court Pretoria Central

Respondent

Companies and Intellectual Property Commission

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Sevipix 11 CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment Under Rule 31(2)(b) and Common Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant furnished a reasonable and acceptable explanation for his default in not defending the main action.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant brought the rescission application bona fide and has a bona fide defence to the plaintiff's claim.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements for rescission under Rule 31(2)(b) and the common law are satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a reasonable and acceptable explanation for his default in not defending the main action, as he was aware of the proceedings through communications from his attorneys and did not take steps to defend. He did not adequately explain the delay in bringing the rescission application, with significant periods unaccounted for. The applicant also failed to establish a bona fide defence, as the evidence indicated he was aware of and involved in the arrangements regarding the property and close corporation. The conflicting expert reports and the confirmatory affidavit from a police officer undermined his denial of the affidavit. The requirements for rescission under...

Court Disposition

Application for rescission of default judgment and joinder dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for rescission of the default judgment is dismissed with costs.
  • The application for joinder of K2016312397 (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd is dismissed.