Sangweni and Another v MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Division (26465/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 469 (12 July 2021)

Sangweni and Another v MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Division (26465/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 469 (12 July 2021)

The court found that the defendant's special plea was vague and embarrassing as it failed to set out the factual basis for the alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions. The references to sections of the State Liability Act were either unsupported by facts or referred to non-existent sections. This lack of specificity prejudiced the plaintiffs in their ability to plead, replicate, and prepare for trial. The court held that the special plea did not contain the necessary averments to sustain a defence and that the exception should be upheld. However, rather than striking out the special plea, the court granted the defendant leave to amend the special plea within fifteen days.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 469
Parties
Plaintiff: Anna Sphiwe Sangweni; Plaintiff: Mkhosini Johannes Mahlangu; Defendant: MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Division
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 July 2021
Case Number
26465/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Exception to Special Plea
Outcome
Exception upheld with costs; defendant granted leave to amend special plea within fifteen days.
Judges
E.M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State, State Liability Act Compliance
Civil Procedure Exception Procedure Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State State Liability Act Compliance

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anna Sphiwe Sangweni

Plaintiff

Mkhosini Johannes Mahlangu

Plaintiff

MEC for Health, Gauteng Provincial Division

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Exception to Special Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's special plea is vague and embarrassing and/or lacks averments necessary to sustain a defence.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's special plea provides sufficient factual basis for the alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions.
  3. 3 Whether the special plea should be struck out or the defendant should be granted leave to amend.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's special plea was vague and embarrassing as it failed to set out the factual basis for the alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions. The references to sections of the State Liability Act were either unsupported by facts or referred to non-existent sections. This lack of specificity prejudiced the plaintiffs in their ability to plead, replicate, and prepare for trial. The court held that the special plea did not contain the necessary averments to sustain a defence and that the exception should be upheld. However, rather than striking out the special plea, the court granted the defendant leave to amend the special plea within fifteen days.

Court Disposition

Exception upheld with costs; defendant granted leave to amend special plea within fifteen days.

Orders

  • The exception is upheld with costs.
  • The defendant is granted leave to amend the special plea within fifteen days of this order.