South African Securitisation Programme (RF) LTD and Others v Cellsecure Monitoring and Response (PTY) Ltd and Others (21647/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 925 (25 November 2022)

South African Securitisation Programme (RF) LTD and Others v Cellsecure Monitoring and Response (PTY) Ltd and Others (21647/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 925 (25 November 2022)

The court found that the defendants' plea consisted of bare denials and failed to set out material facts supporting any bona fide defence. The new defences raised in the opposing affidavit were not in harmony with the plea and lacked sufficient particularity. The court held that rectification of the rental schedule was permissible, as the parties' true intention was not reflected due to a common error. The certificate of balance issued by SASP constituted prima facie proof of the amount owing, and the defendants did not provide an alternative calculation or evidence disputing the amount. The defence regarding lack of personal knowledge by the deponent was rejected, as the deponent had...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 925
Parties
Plaintiff: South African Securitisation Programme (RF) LTD; Plaintiff: Fintech Underwriting (PTY) LTD; Plaintiff: Sunlyn (PTY) LTD; Defendant: Cellsecure Monitoring and Response (PTY) LTD; Defendant: Cellsecure Interactive Management Solutions (PTY) LTD; Defendant: Cellsecure Holdings (PTY) LTD
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 November 2022
Case Number
21647/2021
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on 25 October 2022
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of the plaintiffs.
Judges
Kooverjie
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Rectification of Contract, Bare Denial, Certificate of Balance, Guarantee and Suretyship
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Summary Judgment Rectification of Contract Bare Denial Certificate of Balance Guarantee and Suretyship

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Securitisation Programme (RF) LTD

Plaintiff

Fintech Underwriting (PTY) LTD

Plaintiff

Sunlyn (PTY) LTD

Plaintiff

Cellsecure Monitoring and Response (PTY) LTD

Defendant

Cellsecure Interactive Management Solutions (PTY) LTD

Defendant

Cellsecure Holdings (PTY) LTD

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on 25 October 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants have raised bona fide defences to resist summary judgment.
  2. 2 Whether rectification of the rental schedule to the rental agreement is permissible in summary judgment proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the certificate of balance constitutes prima facie proof of indebtedness.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendants' plea consisted of bare denials and failed to set out material facts supporting any bona fide defence. The new defences raised in the opposing affidavit were not in harmony with the plea and lacked sufficient particularity. The court held that rectification of the rental schedule was permissible, as the parties' true intention was not reflected due to a common error. The certificate of balance issued by SASP constituted prima facie proof of the amount owing, and the defendants did not provide an alternative calculation or evidence disputing the amount. The defence regarding lack of personal knowledge by the deponent was rejected, as the deponent had...

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of the plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Rectification of the rental schedule to the rental agreement by substituting the description of the user from Cellsecure Holdings (Pty) Ltd – 2001/007287/07 to Cellsecure Monitoring and Response (Pty) Ltd – 1999/020357/07.
  • Payment of the sum of R4,327,956.81.