Van Den Heever v Netcare Cape (Pty) Ltd and Another (21453/10) [2013] ZAWCHC 197 (8 November 2013)

Van Den Heever v Netcare Cape (Pty) Ltd and Another (21453/10) [2013] ZAWCHC 197 (8 November 2013)

The court found that the defendant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for its delay in issuing the third party notice before the close of pleadings. The information relied upon for joinder was within the defendant's knowledge prior to the close of pleadings, and no adequate detail was provided regarding what new information came to light. Furthermore, the defendant did not file any supporting or confirmatory affidavits from medical experts, particularly Professor Smith, whose opinion was said to be pivotal. In the absence of such evidence, the defendant did not make out a prima facie case against the respondent. The court held that basic fairness and the interests of justice...

Citation
[2013] ZAWCHC 197
Parties
Plaintiff: Michael David van den Heever; Defendant: Netcare Cape (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Dr Deon Smith
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 November 2013
Case Number
21453/10
Procedural Posture
Joinder Application / Application for Leave to Join Third Party After Close of Pleadings
Outcome
Application for joinder of third party dismissed with costs.
Judges
Le Grange
Legal Topics
Joinder of Third Party, Rule 13 Uniform Rules, Prima Facie Case Requirement, Condonation for Late Joinder
Civil Procedure Joinder of Third Party Rule 13 Uniform Rules Prima Facie Case Requirement Condonation for Late Joinder

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael David van den Heever

Plaintiff

Netcare Cape (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Dr Deon Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Joinder Application / Application for Leave to Join Third Party After Close of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant furnished a satisfactory explanation for its failure to issue the third party notice before close of pleadings.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant made out a prima facie case against the respondent for joinder as a third party under Rule 13(3)(b).

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for its delay in issuing the third party notice before the close of pleadings. The information relied upon for joinder was within the defendant's knowledge prior to the close of pleadings, and no adequate detail was provided regarding what new information came to light. Furthermore, the defendant did not file any supporting or confirmatory affidavits from medical experts, particularly Professor Smith, whose opinion was said to be pivotal. In the absence of such evidence, the defendant did not make out a prima facie case against the respondent. The court held that basic fairness and the interests of justice...

Court Disposition

Application for joinder of third party dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.