Solid Build Contractors CC v Jacobs and Others (229/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 62 (18 May 2017)

Solid Build Contractors CC v Jacobs and Others (229/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 62 (18 May 2017)

The court found that the plaintiff was fully aware of the defendants' bona fide defence, as it had been comprehensively set out in the answering affidavit in the previous action. Despite this, the plaintiff proceeded with a summary judgment application that was foredoomed to failure and put the defendants to unnecessary trouble and expense. The plaintiff's attempt to remove the matter from the roll was irregular and ineffective, and the defendants were entitled to persist with their opposition and argue costs. The court held that the plaintiff's conduct amounted to an abuse of the summary judgment procedure and, in accordance with Uniform rule 32(9)(a) and established case law, ordered...

Citation
[2017] ZAFSHC 62
Parties
Plaintiff: Solid Build Contractors CC; Defendant: Johannes Petrus Jacobs; Defendant: We Build CC; Defendant: Johannes Petrus Jacobs N.O.; Defendant: Carel Jacobus Swanepoel Jacobs N.O.; Defendant: The Maluti Trust
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 May 2017
Case Number
229/2017
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment; Determination of Costs After Leave to Defend Granted
Outcome
Summary judgment refused; leave to defend granted; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs on attorney and client scale, with specified exclusions.
Judges
Snellenburg
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Costs Award, Attorney and Client Scale, Leave to Defend, Excipient Pleading
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Costs Award Attorney and Client Scale Leave to Defend Excipient Pleading

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

Parties

Solid Build Contractors CC

Plaintiff

Johannes Petrus Jacobs

Defendant

We Build CC

Defendant

Johannes Petrus Jacobs N.O.

Defendant

Carel Jacobus Swanepoel Jacobs N.O.

Defendant

The Maluti Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Application for Summary Judgment; Determination of Costs After Leave to Defend Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff, knowing the defendants' bona fide defence, was justified in applying for summary judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the defendants are entitled to costs on an attorney and client scale due to the plaintiff's conduct.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's notice of removal of the application from the roll was legally effective.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was fully aware of the defendants' bona fide defence, as it had been comprehensively set out in the answering affidavit in the previous action. Despite this, the plaintiff proceeded with a summary judgment application that was foredoomed to failure and put the defendants to unnecessary trouble and expense. The plaintiff's attempt to remove the matter from the roll was irregular and ineffective, and the defendants were entitled to persist with their opposition and argue costs. The court held that the plaintiff's conduct amounted to an abuse of the summary judgment procedure and, in accordance with Uniform rule 32(9)(a) and established case law, ordered...

Court Disposition

Summary judgment refused; leave to defend granted; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs on attorney and client scale, with specified exclusions.

Orders

  • Summary judgment is refused and leave is granted to the defendants to defend the action.
  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the summary judgment proceedings on the attorney and client scale.