Download PDF

South Africa Judgment

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Investec Bank Limited v Van Heerden and Others (17890/2010) [2017] ZAGPPHC 288 (14 June 2017)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the plaintiff had complied with all procedural requirements for obtaining judgment based on a written confession to judgment. The certificates of balance provided by the plaintiff established the amounts owed by the defendants, and the defendants failed to respond to the demands for payment. The amounts became due and payable seven days after the demand was sent. The court declined to declare immovable property executable due to lack of evidence linking the properties to the defendants' indebtedness. Judgment was granted for the certified amounts, interest, and costs.

Court disposition

Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff for the certified amounts, interest, and costs. Application for declaring immovable property executable refused.

Orders

  • The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants are ordered to pay, jointly and severally, the amounts of R5 383 872.77 and R3 303 680.09 to the plaintiff within five days from the date of this order.
  • The defendants are ordered to pay interest on the said amounts at 8.75% per annum from 1 December 2016 to date of payment, calculated daily and compounded monthly.
  • The defendants are ordered to pay the costs.

02

Material facts

Parties

Investec Bank Limited

Plaintiff

Anthea Phoebe-Jane Van Heerden

Defendant

Izak Albertus Van Heerden

Defendant

Afrikings (Pty) Limited

Defendant

New Invest 263 (Pty) Limited

Defendant

Amounts and remedies

  • Debt Owed on Account 216408/001: ZAR 5,383,872.77
  • Debt Owed on Account 216408/002: ZAR 3,303,680.09
  • Interest Rate Per Annum: ZAR 8.75

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Procedure / Application for Judgment in Terms of Confession Under Rule 31(1)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The plaintiff contends that the defendants signed a written confession to judgment, thereby acknowledging their indebtedness. The plaintiff issued certificates of balance and made formal demands for payment, which were ignored by the defendants. The plaintiff seeks judgment for the certified amounts, interest, and costs, and also requests an order declaring certain immovable properties executable.
Respondent
The defendants did not file any opposing papers or arguments. There is no evidence before the court contesting the plaintiff's claims or the validity of the confession to judgment.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Uniform Rules of Court, Rule 31(1)

    A written confession to judgment in terms of Rule 31(1) entitles the plaintiff to judgment if all procedural requirements are met.

  2. 02

    Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Oneanate Investments (Pty) Ltd 1998 (1) SA 811 (SCA)

    A certificate of balance signed by an authorized representative of the creditor is prima facie proof of the amount owed.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff had complied with all procedural requirements for obtaining judgment based on a written confession to judgment. The certificates of balance provided by the plaintiff established the amounts owed by the defendants, and the defendants failed to respond to the demands for payment. The amounts became due and payable seven days after the demand was sent. The court declined to declare immovable property executable due to lack of evidence linking the properties to the defendants' indebtedness. Judgment was granted for the certified amounts, interest, and costs.

Obiter and limits

  • The court noted that applications for orders declaring property executable must be supported by evidence establishing ownership and a nexus to the debt.
  • Failure to provide such evidence will result in the refusal of the relief sought in respect of property execution.

Court disposition

Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff for the certified amounts, interest, and costs. Application for declaring immovable property executable refused.

  • The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants are ordered to pay, jointly and severally, the amounts of R5 383 872.77 and R3 303 680.09 to the plaintiff within five days from the date of this order.
  • The defendants are ordered to pay interest on the said amounts at 8.75% per annum from 1 December 2016 to date of payment, calculated daily and compounded monthly.
  • The defendants are ordered to pay the costs.

Source and reliance status

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Judgment

[2017] ZAGPPHC 288

IN

THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

CASE NO: 17890/2010

In the matter between:

INVESTEC

BANK LIMITED Plaintiff

and

ANTHEA PHOEBE-JANE VAN HEERDEN First

Defendant

IZAK

ALBERTUS VAN HEERDEN Second

Defendant

AFRIKINGS (PTY) LIMITED Third

Defendant

NEW INVEST 263 (PTY) LIMITED Fourth Defendant

JUDGMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CONFESSION TO JUDGMENT IN TERMS OF RULE 31 (1)

MBONGWE, AJ:

[1] This is an application for a written judgment for payment of monies pursuant to a written consent to judgment in terms of Rule 31(10 of the rules of this court. The

\

said confession was signed by the 1st 2nd and 3rd defendants, the latter being represented by the 2nd defendant on the 17th March 2014. This application was considered in chambers.

[2] I have perused the documents in the file which consists of the written confession to judgment, an affidavit deposed to by the

plaintiff's attorney, a letter of demand dated 1st November 2016 and addressed by the plaintiff's to the defendants' as well as two certificates of balances both dated 1st November 2016 and signed by two Recoveries Managers in the employ of the plaintiff. The certificate certify that the defendants are indebted to the plaintiff in the amounts of R5 383 872.77 in respect of account number 216408/001 and R3 303 608.09 in respect of account number 216408/002, respectively.

[3] I have satisfied myself that the plaintiff has fully complied with the terms of the written confession to judgment with regard to the issuing of the certificates of balances and making demands for payment and putting the defendants in mora. Despite the demands addressed to their attorneys in terms of the confession to judgment, the defendants have failed to settle the debts to the plaintiff. I find, in consequence, that the amounts depicted on the certificates of balances referred to above became due and payable in full seven days after the date the email containing the demand, being 1st November 2016, was sent.

[4] The plaintiff has also sought order declaring certain immovable properties executable. There are no documents before me detailing ownership of these properties nor is there a nexus established between the defendants' indebtedness to the plaintiff and such properties. I will not, therefore entertain this part of the plaintiff's case and prayer.

[5] In the result I make the following order:

1. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants are ordered to pay, jointly and severally the one paying the others to be absolved, the amounts of R5 383 872.77 and R3 303 680.09 to the plaintiff within five days from the date of this order.

2. The defendants are also ordered to pay interest on the said amounts at 8.75% per annum from 1 December 2016 to date of payment, calculated daily and compounded monthly.

3. The defendants are ordered to pay the costs.

______

M

MBONGWE AJ

ACTING

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

PRETORIA.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Oneanate Investments (Pty) Ltd 1998 (1) SA 811 (SCA)

Case cited

Uniform Rules of Court, Rule 31(1)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.