Raphaely and Another v Octagon Financial Services (Pty) Ltd (22/1508) [2022] ZAGPJHC 840 (24 October 2022)

Raphaely and Another v Octagon Financial Services (Pty) Ltd (22/1508) [2022] ZAGPJHC 840 (24 October 2022)

The court held that the defendant's exception could not succeed. The plaintiffs' particulars of claim, although pleaded in the alternative and conditional on a finding in another action, are not vague and embarrassing nor do they lack averments necessary to sustain a cause of action. The reasoning in Sun International applies: the particulars contain an implicit alternative allegation that the plaintiffs contracted with the defendant in their personal capacities. The omission of an intention to consolidate does not render the pleading excipiable. The exception was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 840
Parties
Plaintiff: Lynne Adrienne Raphaely; Plaintiff: Lynne Adrienne Raphaely N.O.; Defendant: Octagon Financial Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 October 2022
Case Number
22/1508
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
Van der Berg
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Cause of Action, Conditional Claims
Civil Procedure Exception Procedure Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Cause of Action Conditional Claims

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynne Adrienne Raphaely

Plaintiff

Lynne Adrienne Raphaely N.O.

Plaintiff

Octagon Financial Services (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing or lack averments necessary to sustain a cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether the conditional nature of the claim renders the pleading excipiable.
  3. 3 Whether the omission of an intention to consolidate actions affects the validity of the particulars of claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the defendant's exception could not succeed. The plaintiffs' particulars of claim, although pleaded in the alternative and conditional on a finding in another action, are not vague and embarrassing nor do they lack averments necessary to sustain a cause of action. The reasoning in Sun International applies: the particulars contain an implicit alternative allegation that the plaintiffs contracted with the defendant in their personal capacities. The omission of an intention to consolidate does not render the pleading excipiable. The exception was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs.