Urger v Rand Water Raad (16/2004) [2004] ZAFSHC 29 (29 April 2004)

Urger v Rand Water Raad (16/2004) [2004] ZAFSHC 29 (29 April 2004)

The court held that the order granted on 7 November 2003 gave the respondent unconditional leave to amend its special plea within 15 days. This leave constituted permission to file the amended special plea without further application or notification under Rule 28. The respondent's filing of the amended special plea within the specified period satisfied the court order, and the applicant was not entitled to object under Rule 28. Any challenge to the content of the amended plea must be made by way of exception under Rule 23 or possibly Rule 30, not by objection to the amendment procedure. The court declared the amended special plea valid and ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the...

Citation
[2004] ZAFSHC 29
Parties
Applicant: Izak Johannes Burger; Respondent: Rand Water Raad
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 April 2004
Case Number
16/2004
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interpretation of Previous Court Order Regarding Amendment of Special Plea
Outcome
Application dismissed; declaratory order granted in favour of the respondent.
Judges
Hattingh, R
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Special Plea, Court Order Interpretation, Rule 28 Procedure
Civil Procedure Amendment of Pleadings Special Plea Court Order Interpretation Rule 28 Procedure

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Izak Johannes Burger

Applicant

Rand Water Raad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interpretation of Previous Court Order Regarding Amendment of Special Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was required to apply under Rule 28 for leave to amend its special plea after the court had already granted leave.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant could object to the amended special plea under Rule 28.
  3. 3 What is the effect of a court order granting leave to amend a plea without restrictions.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the order granted on 7 November 2003 gave the respondent unconditional leave to amend its special plea within 15 days. This leave constituted permission to file the amended special plea without further application or notification under Rule 28. The respondent's filing of the amended special plea within the specified period satisfied the court order, and the applicant was not entitled to object under Rule 28. Any challenge to the content of the amended plea must be made by way of exception under Rule 23 or possibly Rule 30, not by objection to the amendment procedure. The court declared the amended special plea valid and ordered the applicant to pay the costs of the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; declaratory order granted in favour of the respondent.

Orders

  • It is declared that the respondent's (first defendant in the main action No. 141/2003) special plea has been validly amended as set out in the document titled 'First Defendant's Amended Plea'.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of this application.