Suid-Afrikaanse Stamboek- en Veeverbeteringsvereniging v State Information Technology Agency (Edms) Bpk (3557/2005) [2006] ZAFSHC 138 (9 February 2006)

Suid-Afrikaanse Stamboek- en Veeverbeteringsvereniging v State Information Technology Agency (Edms) Bpk (3557/2005) [2006] ZAFSHC 138 (9 February 2006)

The court found that the respondent's declaration and answers to requests for further particulars were incomplete and improper. The respondent failed to identify the agents involved in the contract cession, did not provide adequate details about the nature, timing, and site of services rendered, and gave vague and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] ZAFSHC 138
Parties
Applicant: Suid-Afrikaanse Stamboek- en Veeverbeteringsvereniging; Respondent: State Information Technology Agency (Edms) Bpk
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 February 2006
Case Number
3557/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Compel Further Particulars Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application to compel further particulars granted in favour of the applicant.
Judges
M.H. Rampai
Legal Topics
Further Particulars, Pleading Requirements, Contract Cession, Rule 18 Uniform Rules, Quantification of Claim
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Further Particulars Pleading Requirements Contract Cession Rule 18 Uniform Rules Quantification of Claim

Source-derived case record

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suid-Afrikaanse Stamboek- en Veeverbeteringsvereniging

Applicant

State Information Technology Agency (Edms) Bpk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Compel Further Particulars Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's declaration and answers to requests for further particulars are complete and proper as required by Rule 18(6) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to detailed information regarding the contract, services rendered, and quantification of the claim to prepare for trial.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's failure to provide specific particulars prejudices the applicant's ability to defend the claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's declaration and answers to requests for further particulars were incomplete and improper. The respondent failed to identify the agents involved in the contract cession, did not provide adequate details about the nature, timing, and site of services rendered, and gave vague and technical answers regarding the quantification of the claim. The court held that the applicant was entitled to these particulars as of right under Rule 18(6) of the Uniform Rules of Court, regardless of whether they were strictly necessary for trial preparation. The lack of sufficient particulars prejudiced the applicant's ability to prepare its defence and appoint expert...

Court Disposition

Application to compel further particulars granted in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to furnish the applicant with complete and proper answers to paragraphs 1.2, 1.3, 2.2.2, 3 and 5 of the applicant's request for further particulars dated 20 July 2005 under case number 3811/03.
  • The respondent is directed to pay the applicant's taxed costs relating to this application on the scale as between party and party.