Seneca Civils (Pty) Ltd v Centriq Insurance Company Ltd (2016/12450) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1063 (22 September 2023)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Written Reasons Following Ex Tempore Order

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the defendant's expert is obliged to sign the joint expert minute or produce his own minute of the meeting.
2. 2 Whether the defendant's refusal to sign or comment on the minute is justified under the Uniform Rules and Practice Manual.
3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to relief compelling compliance and costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no legal or factual basis for the defendant's expert to refuse to sign the joint minute or to fail to produce his own minute. The meeting between the experts had taken place, and any disagreements or outstanding issues could be recorded in the minute. The refusal to sign or comment on the minute undermined the case management process and was contrary to the requirements of the Practice Manual and Uniform Rules. The court found the defendant's argument that the meeting was incomplete due to missing documentation to be fallacious, as such issues could be noted in the minute. Accordingly, the court granted the plaintiff's application compelling the defendant to...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's interlocutory application granted; defendant compelled to comply with joint expert minute requirements and ordered to pay costs.

Orders

• Within 10 days, the defendant must cause its expert, Mr Peter Banbury, to sign the joint expert’s minute sent on 21 February 2020 or produce his own minute of the meeting.
• If the defendant fails to comply, the plaintiff may re-enrol the application, supplemented as required, to seek further relief, including striking out the defendant’s plea with costs.