Selesho v FNB (40719/16) [2020] ZAGPPHC 511 (7 September 2020)

Selesho v FNB (40719/16) [2020] ZAGPPHC 511 (7 September 2020)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and candid explanation for the circumstances in which the admission was made and for the delay in seeking its withdrawal. The applicant's conduct, including his lack of transparency regarding his dealings with Holmes and the business venture, undermined his bona fides. The court held that the admission made by the applicant's attorney was consistent with the evidence and the applicant's own statements in other forums. Furthermore, the withdrawal of the admission would cause prejudice to the respondent, particularly due to the death of Holmes, who could have been a key witness. The court concluded that the requirements for...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 511
Parties
Applicant: J Selesho; Respondent: FNB
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 September 2020
Case Number
40719/16
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Withdraw Admission Made During Pre Trial Conference
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
M V NQUMSE
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Admission, Rule 37 Uniform Rules, Contractual Delivery, Prejudice in Amendment, Bona Fide Requirement
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Withdrawal of Admission Rule 37 Uniform Rules Contractual Delivery Prejudice in Amendment Bona Fide Requirement

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J Selesho

Applicant

FNB

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Withdraw Admission Made During Pre Trial Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted leave to withdraw an admission made during the pre-trial conference under Rule 37.
  2. 2 Whether the admission was made bona fide or as a result of a mistake contrary to the applicant's instructions.
  3. 3 Whether the withdrawal of the admission would cause prejudice to the respondent that cannot be cured by a costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and candid explanation for the circumstances in which the admission was made and for the delay in seeking its withdrawal. The applicant's conduct, including his lack of transparency regarding his dealings with Holmes and the business venture, undermined his bona fides. The court held that the admission made by the applicant's attorney was consistent with the evidence and the applicant's own statements in other forums. Furthermore, the withdrawal of the admission would cause prejudice to the respondent, particularly due to the death of Holmes, who could have been a key witness. The court concluded that the requirements for...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to withdraw the admission is dismissed with costs.