Masekwameng and Another v Pseidl (40697/2005) [2006] ZAGPHC 233 (21 August 2006)

Masekwameng and Another v Pseidl (40697/2005) [2006] ZAGPHC 233 (21 August 2006)

The court held that the lease agreement was subject to a suspensive condition requiring the defendant to obtain a work and residency permit and to inform the applicants. The defendant's plea did not allege fulfilment of this condition, and merely stating that all obligations under the lease were fulfilled was insufficient. The contract was inchoate until the condition was met, and no obligations arose before fulfilment. Therefore, the plea failed to disclose a valid defence and was excipiable. The exception was upheld, and the defendant's plea was set aside with leave to amend.

Citation
[2006] ZAGPHC 233
Parties
Applicant: Lesahja Daniel Masekwameng; Applicant: Molonatjo Paulina Masekwameng; Respondent: Anton Pseidl
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 August 2006
Case Number
40697/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Exception to Plea
Outcome
Plaintiffs' exception to the plea is upheld. Defendant's plea is set aside with costs. Defendant is granted leave to file an amended plea within 21 days.
Judges
Murphy
Legal Topics
Lease Agreement, Suspensive Condition, Pleading Requirements, Unlawful Occupation
Land and Property Civil Procedure Lease Agreement Suspensive Condition Pleading Requirements Unlawful Occupation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lesahja Daniel Masekwameng

Applicant

Molonatjo Paulina Masekwameng

Applicant

Anton Pseidl

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Exception to Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's plea discloses a valid defence in light of the suspensive condition in the lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether failure to plead fulfilment of the suspensive condition renders the plea excipiable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the lease agreement was subject to a suspensive condition requiring the defendant to obtain a work and residency permit and to inform the applicants. The defendant's plea did not allege fulfilment of this condition, and merely stating that all obligations under the lease were fulfilled was insufficient. The contract was inchoate until the condition was met, and no obligations arose before fulfilment. Therefore, the plea failed to disclose a valid defence and was excipiable. The exception was upheld, and the defendant's plea was set aside with leave to amend.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' exception to the plea is upheld. Defendant's plea is set aside with costs. Defendant is granted leave to file an amended plea within 21 days.

Orders

  • The defendant's plea is set aside with costs.
  • The defendant is given leave to file an amended plea within 21 days of this order.