SS Profiling (Pty) Ltd vTerblanche (65745/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 17 (25 January 2021)

SS Profiling (Pty) Ltd vTerblanche (65745/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 17 (25 January 2021)

The respondent raised special pleas of lack of locus standi and lack of jurisdiction, which the court found to be bona fide and good in law, with a real possibility of success at trial. The applicant failed to attach the written agreement to its particulars of claim as required by uniform rule 18(6), rendering the pleadings exceptiable. The court held that the summary judgment application could not succeed in light of these valid defences and procedural shortcomings. Furthermore, the applicant was aware of the respondent's defences prior to launching the application and should have anticipated opposition. Accordingly, the application for summary judgment was dismissed with costs, and the...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 17
Parties
Applicant: SS Profiling (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: J P Terblanche
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 January 2021
Case Number
65745/2019
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Application for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Application for summary judgment dismissed with costs; respondent granted leave to defend.
Judges
E.M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Locus Standi, Jurisdiction, Exceptio Vagueness, Pleadings Requirements
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Locus Standi Jurisdiction Exceptio Vagueness Pleadings Requirements

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SS Profiling (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

J P Terblanche

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Application for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's special pleas of lack of locus standi and lack of jurisdiction constitute bona fide defences to the applicant's claim.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's particulars of claim are exceptiable for failing to attach the written agreement as required by the rules.
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted in light of the respondent's pleaded defences.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent raised special pleas of lack of locus standi and lack of jurisdiction, which the court found to be bona fide and good in law, with a real possibility of success at trial. The applicant failed to attach the written agreement to its particulars of claim as required by uniform rule 18(6), rendering the pleadings exceptiable. The court held that the summary judgment application could not succeed in light of these valid defences and procedural shortcomings. Furthermore, the applicant was aware of the respondent's defences prior to launching the application and should have anticipated opposition. Accordingly, the application for summary judgment was dismissed with costs, and the...

Court Disposition

Application for summary judgment dismissed with costs; respondent granted leave to defend.

Orders

  • The application for summary judgment is dismissed with costs.
  • The respondent is granted leave to defend the matter.