Mgobozi v Minister Of Police (47070/17) [2018] ZAGPPHC 838 (9 November 2018)

Mgobozi v Minister Of Police (47070/17) [2018] ZAGPPHC 838 (9 November 2018)

The court found that the Plaintiff's particulars of claim failed to specify whether the claim was based on contract or delict, leaving the Defendant uncertain as to the case it was required to meet. Essential elements for both causes of action were not pleaded: in contract, the terms and breach were missing; in delict, the duty of care and causation were absent. The damages claimed were presented as a lump sum without any particulars of quantification. As a result, the particulars of claim were both vague and embarrassing and did not disclose a cause of action. The exception was upheld, and the Plaintiff was granted leave to amend the particulars of claim within twenty days, failing which...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 838
Parties
Plaintiff: Thembi Nkosi Henry Mgobozi; Defendant: Minister Of Police
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 November 2018
Case Number
47070/17
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception upheld; Plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim within twenty days, failing which the claim is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Brand
Legal Topics
Exception to Particulars of Claim, Vagueness and Embarrassment, Breach of Contract, Negligent Misrepresentation, Quantification of Damages
Civil Procedure Delict Commercial and Corporate Exception to Particulars of Claim Vagueness and Embarrassment Breach of Contract Negligent Misrepresentation Quantification of Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thembi Nkosi Henry Mgobozi

Plaintiff

Minister Of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing.
  3. 3 Whether the claim is founded in contract, delict, or both.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff's particulars of claim failed to specify whether the claim was based on contract or delict, leaving the Defendant uncertain as to the case it was required to meet. Essential elements for both causes of action were not pleaded: in contract, the terms and breach were missing; in delict, the duty of care and causation were absent. The damages claimed were presented as a lump sum without any particulars of quantification. As a result, the particulars of claim were both vague and embarrassing and did not disclose a cause of action. The exception was upheld, and the Plaintiff was granted leave to amend the particulars of claim within twenty days, failing which...

Court Disposition

Exception upheld; Plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim within twenty days, failing which the claim is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is upheld.
  • The Plaintiff is given leave to amend its particulars of claim within twenty days of the date of this order.