Siyandisa Music (Pty) Ltd v Gallo Music Publishers (Pty) Ltd (2016/75684) [2018] ZAGPPHC 530 (17 April 2018)

Siyandisa Music (Pty) Ltd v Gallo Music Publishers (Pty) Ltd (2016/75684) [2018] ZAGPPHC 530 (17 April 2018)

The court found that the applicant is not a party to the tripartite agreement and failed to properly plead its right to claim the relief sought. There is no evidence that the respondent has a duty to render the account as claimed. The proposed amendment introduces additional relief not foreshadowed in the founding papers, and allowing it would cause prejudice and injustice to the respondent that cannot be compensated by costs. The applicant is not entitled to the relief sought, and the application to amend is dismissed.

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 530
Parties
Applicant: Siyandisa Music (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Gallo Music Publishers (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 April 2018
Case Number
2016/75684
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Amend Notice of Motion in Main Application
Outcome
Application to amend notice of motion dismissed with costs.
Judges
S S Mphahlele
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Declaratory Relief, Fiduciary Duty to Account, Contractual Obligation to Account
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Declaratory Relief Fiduciary Duty to Account Contractual Obligation to Account

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

Parties

Siyandisa Music (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Gallo Music Publishers (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Amend Notice of Motion in Main Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to amend its notice of motion to introduce additional relief for statement and debatement of accounts.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established a contractual or fiduciary basis for the respondent's duty to account.
  3. 3 Whether the proposed amendment is foreshadowed in the founding papers and would cause prejudice to the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is not a party to the tripartite agreement and failed to properly plead its right to claim the relief sought. There is no evidence that the respondent has a duty to render the account as claimed. The proposed amendment introduces additional relief not foreshadowed in the founding papers, and allowing it would cause prejudice and injustice to the respondent that cannot be compensated by costs. The applicant is not entitled to the relief sought, and the application to amend is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application to amend notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to amend the notice of motion is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.