M.R.R v L.G.M (35413/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 744 (27 October 2021)

M.R.R v L.G.M (35413/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 744 (27 October 2021)

The court found that the plaintiff's particulars of claim were vague and embarrassing, as she failed to specify which customary rituals were not performed and did not allege which requirements for a valid customary marriage were not met. The plaintiff also failed to make necessary averments regarding the existence and subsistence of the marriage and did not pray for a decree of divorce. The court held that the second, third, and partially the fourth exceptions raised by the defendant were valid. The plaintiff was granted leave to amend her particulars of claim within 15 days and ordered to pay the costs of the exception, limited to one day for appearance.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 744
Parties
Plaintiff: M[....] R[....] R[....]; Defendant: L[....] G[....] M[....]
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 October 2021
Case Number
35413/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exceptions upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim; costs awarded to defendant.
Judges
JF Barnardt
Legal Topics
Customary Marriage Validity, Exceptions to Pleadings, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Forfeiture of Patrimonial Benefits
Family and Children Civil Procedure Customary Marriage Validity Exceptions to Pleadings Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Forfeiture of Patrimonial Benefits

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M[....] R[....] R[....]

Plaintiff

L[....] G[....] M[....]

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's particulars of claim disclose a cause of action regarding the validity of the customary marriage.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing due to lack of necessary averments.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff failed to pray for the necessary relief, including a decree of divorce.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's particulars of claim were vague and embarrassing, as she failed to specify which customary rituals were not performed and did not allege which requirements for a valid customary marriage were not met. The plaintiff also failed to make necessary averments regarding the existence and subsistence of the marriage and did not pray for a decree of divorce. The court held that the second, third, and partially the fourth exceptions raised by the defendant were valid. The plaintiff was granted leave to amend her particulars of claim within 15 days and ordered to pay the costs of the exception, limited to one day for appearance.

Court Disposition

Exceptions upheld; plaintiff granted leave to amend particulars of claim; costs awarded to defendant.

Orders

  • The second, third and partially fourth exceptions are upheld.
  • The plaintiff is given leave to amend the particulars of claim by notice of amendment within 15 days of the date of this order.