Ngobeni v Government Employees Pension Fund (2119/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 218 (29 March 2021)

Ngobeni v Government Employees Pension Fund (2119/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 218 (29 March 2021)

The respondent failed to comply with the court order dated 11 December 2019, which required leave to supplement within five days of service. The Notice of Withdrawal filed by the respondent did not constitute a withdrawal of leave to supplement as ordered by the court. The supplementary answering affidavit was filed without leave and must be struck out. The applicant complied with the rules of court regarding joinder of Mrs Mutamba. Given the respondent's conduct, including non-compliance with the court order and failure to file heads of argument, a punitive costs order is warranted in favour of the applicant.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 218
Parties
Applicant: Rirhanndzu Beatrice Ngobeni; Respondent: Government Employees Pension Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2021
Case Number
2119/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Leave to Supplement Affidavits
Outcome
Application for leave to supplement is dismissed. Costs awarded against the respondent on a punitive scale.
Judges
KJ Mogale
Legal Topics
Supplementary Affidavit, Rule 41 Withdrawal, Joinder of Parties, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Supplementary Affidavit Rule 41 Withdrawal Joinder of Parties Costs Award

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rirhanndzu Beatrice Ngobeni

Applicant

Government Employees Pension Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Leave to Supplement Affidavits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent complied with the court order dated 11 December 2019 to obtain leave to supplement within five days of service.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's Notice of Withdrawal constituted a withdrawal of leave to supplement as ordered by the court.
  3. 3 Whether the supplementary answering affidavit filed by the respondent without leave should be struck out.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to comply with the court order dated 11 December 2019, which required leave to supplement within five days of service. The Notice of Withdrawal filed by the respondent did not constitute a withdrawal of leave to supplement as ordered by the court. The supplementary answering affidavit was filed without leave and must be struck out. The applicant complied with the rules of court regarding joinder of Mrs Mutamba. Given the respondent's conduct, including non-compliance with the court order and failure to file heads of argument, a punitive costs order is warranted in favour of the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to supplement is dismissed. Costs awarded against the respondent on a punitive scale.

Orders

  • The application for leave to supplement is dismissed.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay costs.