Special Investigating Unit and Others v Kajee (GP22/2021) [2023] ZAST 5 (28 February 2023)

Special Investigating Unit and Others v Kajee (GP22/2021) [2023] ZAST 5 (28 February 2023)

The Tribunal found that the defendant's exception was not filed in accordance with the prescribed procedure, as Uniform Rule 23 requires exceptions to be brought as pleadings and not by application. The defendant's reliance on Tribunal Rule 10(10) was misplaced, as exceptions are not interlocutory applications but pleadings. The defendant failed to file the exception within the prescribed period and, in terms of Tribunal Rule 13(3), is ipso facto barred from filing a plea, counterclaim, or exception. The defendant's conduct was dilatory and contrary to the rules, justifying a punitive costs order. The exception application was set aside as an irregular step.

Citation
[2023] ZAST 5
Parties
Applicant: The Special Investigating Unit; Applicant: The Minister of Police; Applicant: The Minister of Health; Applicant: The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; Respondent: Hassan Ebrahim Kajee
Court
Special Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 February 2023
Case Number
GP22/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Exception as Irregular Step
Outcome
The defendant's exception application is set aside as an irregular step. The defendant is ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
L T Modiba
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Irregular Step, Uniform Rules of Court, Tribunal Rules, Bar on Late Pleading
Civil Procedure Exception Procedure Irregular Step Uniform Rules of Court Tribunal Rules Bar on Late 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Special Investigating Unit

Applicant

The Minister of Police

Applicant

The Minister of Health

Applicant

The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Applicant

Hassan Ebrahim Kajee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Interlocutory Application to Set Aside Exception as Irregular Step

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an exception may be brought by way of application procedure in the Special Tribunal.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is ipso facto barred from filing an exception after the prescribed period.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate order when an exception is upheld or set aside as irregular.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the defendant's exception was not filed in accordance with the prescribed procedure, as Uniform Rule 23 requires exceptions to be brought as pleadings and not by application. The defendant's reliance on Tribunal Rule 10(10) was misplaced, as exceptions are not interlocutory applications but pleadings. The defendant failed to file the exception within the prescribed period and, in terms of Tribunal Rule 13(3), is ipso facto barred from filing a plea, counterclaim, or exception. The defendant's conduct was dilatory and contrary to the rules, justifying a punitive costs order. The exception application was set aside as an irregular step.

Court Disposition

The defendant's exception application is set aside as an irregular step. The defendant is ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The defendant's notice of motion supported by a founding affidavit, purported to be an exception in terms of Uniform Rule 23(1) dated 10 November 2022 is set aside as an irregular step.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the Rule 30 application on an attorney and client scale including the costs of two counsel.