Munyaradzi v Road Accident Fund (31742/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 571 (10 June 2025)

Munyaradzi v Road Accident Fund (31742/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 571 (10 June 2025)

The court found it unacceptable that the matter was allowed to remain on the roll when it was not ready for trial, especially given the severe backlog and long waiting periods for court dates. The filing of a practice note indicating readiness, when in fact the matter was not ready, constituted conduct requiring explanation. Accordingly, the court removed the matter from the roll, reserved costs for determination by the trial court, and ordered the plaintiff's attorney to file an affidavit explaining his conduct and providing reasons why he should not be ordered to pay the costs of the postponement de bonis propriis.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 571
Parties
Applicant: Kambanje Munyaradzi; Respondent: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2025
Case Number
31742/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Pre Trial Removal
Outcome
Matter removed from the roll; costs reserved; plaintiff's attorney to file affidavit regarding conduct and possible de bonis propriis costs.
Judges
Yacoob
Legal Topics
Removal From Roll, Costs Reservation, De Bonis Propriis, Practice Note Irregularity
Civil Procedure Removal From Roll Costs Reservation De Bonis Propriis Practice Note Irregularity

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kambanje Munyaradzi

Applicant

Road Accident Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Pre Trial Removal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the matter should be removed from the roll due to lack of readiness for trial.
  2. 2 Whether costs of the postponement should be reserved for determination by the trial court.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's attorney should be required to explain conduct and face possible de bonis propriis costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found it unacceptable that the matter was allowed to remain on the roll when it was not ready for trial, especially given the severe backlog and long waiting periods for court dates. The filing of a practice note indicating readiness, when in fact the matter was not ready, constituted conduct requiring explanation. Accordingly, the court removed the matter from the roll, reserved costs for determination by the trial court, and ordered the plaintiff's attorney to file an affidavit explaining his conduct and providing reasons why he should not be ordered to pay the costs of the postponement de bonis propriis.

Court Disposition

Matter removed from the roll; costs reserved; plaintiff's attorney to file affidavit regarding conduct and possible de bonis propriis costs.

Orders

  • The matter is removed from the roll.
  • Costs are reserved to be determined by the trial court.