Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing v Dumansi Trading; In re: Dumansi Trading v Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing (1750/2013) [2015] ZAFSHC 186 (1 October 2015)

Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing v Dumansi Trading; In re: Dumansi Trading v Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing (1750/2013) [2015] ZAFSHC 186 (1 October 2015)

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a bona fide defence with prospects of success. The applicant's reliance on the cession agreements was misplaced, as the Department of Human Settlement was not bound to pay the respondent under the second cession and had repudiated the claim. The applicant was personally liable for the price of building materials supplied. The delay in bringing the rescission application was condoned, but the substantive deficiency in the applicant's defence was material and could not be remedied by other favourable factors. The applicant did not show sufficient cause to justify rescission of the default judgment, and the application was dismissed with...

Citation
[2015] ZAFSHC 186
Parties
Applicant: Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing; Respondent: Dumansi Trading
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 October 2015
Case Number
1750/2013
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Default Judgment
Outcome
Application for rescission of default judgment dismissed with costs.
Judges
M. H. Rampai
Legal Topics
Rescission of Default Judgment, Condonation of Late Filing, Bona Fide Defence, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Rescission of Default Judgment Condonation of Late Filing Bona Fide Defence Costs Award

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Setsoto Bricks and Manufacturing

Applicant

Dumansi Trading

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment on Application for Rescission of Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for rescission of the default judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a bona fide defence with prospects of success.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in bringing the rescission application should be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a bona fide defence with prospects of success. The applicant's reliance on the cession agreements was misplaced, as the Department of Human Settlement was not bound to pay the respondent under the second cession and had repudiated the claim. The applicant was personally liable for the price of building materials supplied. The delay in bringing the rescission application was condoned, but the substantive deficiency in the applicant's defence was material and could not be remedied by other favourable factors. The applicant did not show sufficient cause to justify rescission of the default judgment, and the application was dismissed with...

Court Disposition

Application for rescission of default judgment dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's rescission application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is directed to pay the respondent's costs on the scale as between party and party.