Prodigy Human Capital Architects (Pty) Ltd v Adcorp Fulfilment Services (Pty) Ltd (17932/18) [2024] ZAGPJHC 698 (19 July 2024)

Prodigy Human Capital Architects (Pty) Ltd v Adcorp Fulfilment Services (Pty) Ltd (17932/18) [2024] ZAGPJHC 698 (19 July 2024)

The court found that the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the timing of the amendment, which was necessitated by the discovery process. The death of Adcorp's key witness, while unfortunate, did not amount to incurable prejudice that would justify refusing the amendment. The amendments were not sought in bad faith, and the particulars of claim, when read as a whole, complied with Rule 18(6) regarding the pleading of contracts. The written agreements were annexed, and the oral agreements were sufficiently pleaded for the respondent to reply. The court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment, noting that any prejudice could be compensated by a costs order.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 698
Parties
Applicant: Prodigy Human Capital Architects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Adcorp Fulfilment Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 July 2024
Case Number
17932/18
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Particulars of Claim Under Rule 28(4)
Outcome
Leave to amend particulars of claim granted; applicant to pay costs of the application.
Judges
WJ Du Plessis
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Rule 28 Uniform Rules, Contractual Dispute, Prejudice Due to Late Amendment, Excipiability of Pleadings
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Rule 28 Uniform Rules Contractual Dispute Prejudice Due to Late Amendment Excipiability of Pleadings

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prodigy Human Capital Architects (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Adcorp Fulfilment Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Amend Particulars of Claim Under Rule 28(4)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend its particulars of claim under Rule 28(4).
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments would cause incurable prejudice to the respondent due to the death of a key witness.
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendments render the particulars of claim excipiable for lack of detail.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant provided a reasonable explanation for the timing of the amendment, which was necessitated by the discovery process. The death of Adcorp's key witness, while unfortunate, did not amount to incurable prejudice that would justify refusing the amendment. The amendments were not sought in bad faith, and the particulars of claim, when read as a whole, complied with Rule 18(6) regarding the pleading of contracts. The written agreements were annexed, and the oral agreements were sufficiently pleaded for the respondent to reply. The court exercised its discretion to allow the amendment, noting that any prejudice could be compensated by a costs order.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend particulars of claim granted; applicant to pay costs of the application.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to amend its particulars of claim.
  • The particulars of claim are amended in accordance with the notice of intention to amend dated 8 September 2021.