Pumeza Bono Inc and Another v L and Others; In Re: L v Nyorka and Another (1661/2014) [2016] ZAECPEHC 59 (22 September 2016)

Pumeza Bono Inc and Another v L and Others; In Re: L v Nyorka and Another (1661/2014) [2016] ZAECPEHC 59 (22 September 2016)

The court found that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim were vague and embarrassing, lacking the necessary detail regarding the nature of the injuries and the physical cause of complaint. The plaintiff was unable to provide further particularity due to the absence of supporting medical evidence, and no medical practitioner was willing to testify in support of the claim. The defects in the particulars of claim were therefore incurable. The court also accepted that the plaintiff's attorneys and counsel could not proceed in good conscience and granted them leave to withdraw. The exception was upheld, and the plaintiff's claim was struck out with costs.

Citation
[2016] ZAECPEHC 59
Parties
Applicant: Pumeza Bono Inc; Applicant: Marinda Veldsman N.O.; Respondent: B. S. L.; Respondent: Dr J Kwasi Nyorka; Respondent: Life Mercantile Hospital (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 September 2016
Case Number
1661/2014
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Second Exception and Application for Withdrawal of Attorneys
Outcome
Exception upheld; plaintiff's claim struck out with costs; attorneys and counsel granted leave to withdraw.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Exception to Particulars of Claim, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Professional Negligence, Withdrawal of Legal Representatives
Civil Procedure Delict Exception to Particulars of Claim Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Professional Negligence Withdrawal of Legal Representatives

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pumeza Bono Inc

Applicant

Marinda Veldsman N.O.

Applicant

B. S. L.

Respondent

Dr J Kwasi Nyorka

Respondent

Life Mercantile Hospital (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Second Exception and Application for Withdrawal of Attorneys

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing and fail to comply with Rule 18(10) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's attorneys and counsel should be granted leave to withdraw as legal representatives.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim were vague and embarrassing, lacking the necessary detail regarding the nature of the injuries and the physical cause of complaint. The plaintiff was unable to provide further particularity due to the absence of supporting medical evidence, and no medical practitioner was willing to testify in support of the claim. The defects in the particulars of claim were therefore incurable. The court also accepted that the plaintiff's attorneys and counsel could not proceed in good conscience and granted them leave to withdraw. The exception was upheld, and the plaintiff's claim was struck out with costs.

Court Disposition

Exception upheld; plaintiff's claim struck out with costs; attorneys and counsel granted leave to withdraw.

Orders

  • The second defendant's exception filed on 16 November 2015 is upheld.
  • The plaintiff's claim is struck out with costs.