St Clair Cooper NO and Others v Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others; In re: St Clair Cooper NO and Others v Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (3523/2012) [2013] ZAFSHC 147 (29 August 2013)

St Clair Cooper NO and Others v Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others; In re: St Clair Cooper NO and Others v Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (3523/2012) [2013] ZAFSHC 147 (29 August 2013)

The court found that the respondents' defence was based on the actual allocation of funds and not on the existence of any agreement regarding allocation. The references to the agreement in the plea served only as background and did not constitute a necessary link in the chain of the respondents' defence. Therefore, the plea was not irregular for failing to comply with Rule 18(6), as the respondents did not rely on the agreement to establish their defence. The application to strike out the plea was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Citation
[2013] ZAFSHC 147
Parties
Applicant: Chavonne Badenhorst St Clair Cooper N.O.; Applicant: Luke Bernard Saffy N.O.; Applicant: Donovan Theodore Majiedt N.O.; Applicant: Dawid Pieter Badenhorst N.O.; Applicant: Barend Johannes Jacobus Bezuidenhout N.O.; Applicant: Ethne Mary van Wyk N.O.; Respondent: Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Diau Daniel Mosia N.O.; Respondent: Ruth Kelebogile Mosia N.O.; Respondent: Kenosi Ezra Mahoma N.O.; Respondent: Efcor-Dipalemo Property (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Maria Johanna Engelbrecht; Respondent: Andries Gustav Le Grange N.O.; Respondent: Cornelius Engelbrecht N.O.
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 August 2013
Case Number
3523/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Portions of Plea Under Rule 30(2)(c)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
L J Lekale
Legal Topics
Pleading Irregularity, Rule 18 Compliance, Rule 30 Application, Allocation of Funds, Contractual Basis of Defence

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

Chavonne Badenhorst St Clair Cooper N.O.

Applicant

Luke Bernard Saffy N.O.

Applicant

Donovan Theodore Majiedt N.O.

Applicant

Dawid Pieter Badenhorst N.O.

Applicant

Barend Johannes Jacobus Bezuidenhout N.O.

Applicant

Ethne Mary van Wyk N.O.

Applicant

Dipalemo Investments (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Diau Daniel Mosia N.O.

Respondent

Ruth Kelebogile Mosia N.O.

Respondent

Kenosi Ezra Mahoma N.O.

Respondent

Efcor-Dipalemo Property (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Maria Johanna Engelbrecht

Respondent

Andries Gustav Le Grange N.O.

Respondent

Cornelius Engelbrecht N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Portions of Plea Under Rule 30(2)(c)

  1. 1 Whether the respondents' plea relies on a contract requiring compliance with Rule 18(6).
  2. 2 Whether references to an agreement in the plea render it irregular and subject to being struck out under Rule 30.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' defence is complete without reference to the alleged agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents' defence was based on the actual allocation of funds and not on the existence of any agreement regarding allocation. The references to the agreement in the plea served only as background and did not constitute a necessary link in the chain of the respondents' defence. Therefore, the plea was not irregular for failing to comply with Rule 18(6), as the respondents did not rely on the agreement to establish their defence. The application to strike out the plea was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicants.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.