Special Investigating Unit and Another v Superfecta Trading 209 (Pty) Ltd and Others (GP06/2022) [2024] ZAST 3 (3 May 2024)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Superfecta Trading 209 (Pty) Ltd and Others (GP06/2022) [2024] ZAST 3 (3 May 2024)

The Tribunal found that the proposed amendments do not introduce a new cause of action but merely increase the quantum of the claim based on newly discovered evidence. The applicants provided a rational and substantiated explanation for the timing and necessity of the amendments, which relate to the same underlying cause of action. The respondents were afforded an opportunity to supplement their answering affidavits, and any prejudice can be compensated by a costs order. The opposition by Superfecta was found to be without substantive basis. The requirements for amendment under Tribunal Rule 15 and established case law are met, and the interests of justice favour granting the amendments.

Citation
[2024] ZAST 3
Parties
Applicant: Special Investigating Unit; Applicant: Transnet SOC LTD; Respondent: Superfecta Trading 209 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: BBDM Bros Advertising Agency (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Zakhele Ezekiel ‘Thabo’ Lebelo; Respondent: Zakhele Ezekiel Lebelo N.O.; Respondent: Aletta Mokgoro Mabitisi N.O.; Respondent: Phathutshedzo Brighton Mashamba; Respondent: Matlhodi Phillicia Mashamba; Respondent: Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited; Respondent: Transnet Retirement Fund; Respondent: Aviwe Ndyamara N.O.; Respondent: Office of the Deeds Registrar, Pretoria; Respondent: Standard Bank of South Africa Limited
Court
Special Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 May 2024
Case Number
GP06/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Amend Notice of Motion Under Tribunal Rule 15
Outcome
Application to amend the notice of motion is granted. Superfecta's opposition is dismissed. Costs awarded against the first respondent.
Judges
L.T. Modiba
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Quantum of Claim, Bribery and Gratification, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Amendment of Pleadings Quantum of Claim Bribery and Gratification 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Special Investigating Unit

Applicant

Transnet SOC LTD

Applicant

Superfecta Trading 209 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

BBDM Bros Advertising Agency (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Zakhele Ezekiel ‘Thabo’ Lebelo

Respondent

Zakhele Ezekiel Lebelo N.O.

Respondent

Aletta Mokgoro Mabitisi N.O.

Respondent

Phathutshedzo Brighton Mashamba

Respondent

Matlhodi Phillicia Mashamba

Respondent

Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Transnet Retirement Fund

Respondent

Aviwe Ndyamara N.O.

Respondent

Office of the Deeds Registrar, Pretoria

Respondent

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Amend Notice of Motion Under Tribunal Rule 15

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirements for amending the applicants' notice of motion under Tribunal Rule 15 are met.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments introduce a new cause of action or merely increase the quantum of the claim.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have provided a sufficient explanation for the belated amendments.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the proposed amendments do not introduce a new cause of action but merely increase the quantum of the claim based on newly discovered evidence. The applicants provided a rational and substantiated explanation for the timing and necessity of the amendments, which relate to the same underlying cause of action. The respondents were afforded an opportunity to supplement their answering affidavits, and any prejudice can be compensated by a costs order. The opposition by Superfecta was found to be without substantive basis. The requirements for amendment under Tribunal Rule 15 and established case law are met, and the interests of justice favour granting the amendments.

Court Disposition

Application to amend the notice of motion is granted. Superfecta's opposition is dismissed. Costs awarded against the first respondent.

Orders

  • Prayer 5 is amended to direct the third respondent to pay Transnet R5,182,767.73 and a further R100,000.00 as bribes, gratification, and secret profits received.
  • Prayers 6.1 and 6.2 are amended to direct the sixth respondent to pay Transnet R2,300,000.00 for the Superfecta contracts and R5,113,255.00 for the BBDM contracts as bribes, gratification, and secret profits.