Rockridge Game Farm (Pty) Ltd v Breedt and Others (34949/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 408 (27 July 2017)

Rockridge Game Farm (Pty) Ltd v Breedt and Others (34949/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 408 (27 July 2017)

The court held that the supplementary affidavit containing handwriting expert evidence was inadmissible as it was filed without leave of court, in contravention of Uniform Rule 6(5). The principle that only three sets of affidavits are permitted in motion proceedings applies, and any further affidavit requires the court's consent. The court found that there were material disputes of fact regarding the ownership and conversion of Vendcorp and the validity of the mortgage bonds, which could not be resolved on the papers. Accordingly, the matter was referred to trial, with the affidavits to stand as pleadings and the issue for determination at trial being whether the signatures on the...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 408
Parties
Applicant: Rockridge Game Farm (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Johannes Breedt; Respondent: Ihlenfeldt Attorneys & Conveyancers; Respondent: Ihlenfeldt, Naudene; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 July 2017
Case Number
34949/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Referral to Trial After Opposed Motion
Outcome
The supplementary affidavit is declared pro non scripto and inadmissible. The matter is referred to trial due to unresolved material disputes of fact.
Judges
E M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Mortgage Bond Cancellation, Ownership Dispute, Affidavit Sequence, Conversion of Entity, Admissibility of Evidence
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Mortgage Bond Cancellation Ownership Dispute Affidavit Sequence Conversion of Entity Admissibility of Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rockridge Game Farm (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Johannes Breedt

Respondent

Ihlenfeldt Attorneys & Conveyancers

Respondent

Ihlenfeldt, Naudene

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Referral to Trial After Opposed Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the supplementary affidavit containing handwriting expert evidence is admissible without leave of court.
  2. 2 Whether there is a material dispute of fact regarding the ownership and conversion of Vendcorp and the validity of the mortgage bonds.
  3. 3 Whether the matter should be referred to trial due to unresolved factual disputes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the supplementary affidavit containing handwriting expert evidence was inadmissible as it was filed without leave of court, in contravention of Uniform Rule 6(5). The principle that only three sets of affidavits are permitted in motion proceedings applies, and any further affidavit requires the court's consent. The court found that there were material disputes of fact regarding the ownership and conversion of Vendcorp and the validity of the mortgage bonds, which could not be resolved on the papers. Accordingly, the matter was referred to trial, with the affidavits to stand as pleadings and the issue for determination at trial being whether the signatures on the...

Court Disposition

The supplementary affidavit is declared pro non scripto and inadmissible. The matter is referred to trial due to unresolved material disputes of fact.

Orders

  • The supplementary affidavit is pro non scripto.
  • The matter is referred to trial.