Van Niekerk and Others v Premier of the Province of the Western Cape and Others (18563/18) [2020] ZAWCHC 128 (15 October 2020)

Van Niekerk and Others v Premier of the Province of the Western Cape and Others (18563/18) [2020] ZAWCHC 128 (15 October 2020)

The court found that the plaintiffs' particulars of claim did not comply with rule 18(4) because they referred to voluminous annexures without identifying the material facts relied upon, resulting in vague and unclear pleadings. This caused significant prejudice to the defendants, who could not ascertain the case they had to meet. The particulars also failed to comply with rule 18(10) as the damages claimed were pleaded as estimates without itemisation or supporting information, making it impossible for the defendants to reasonably assess quantum. The plaintiffs' arguments that the application was moot due to a subsequent notice of intention to amend and that relief should not be sought...

Citation
[2020] ZAWCHC 128
Parties
Plaintiff: Johannes Frederick Van Niekerk and 88 Others; Defendant: Premier of the Province of the Western Cape; Defendant: Municipality of Mossel Bay; Defendant: National Home Builders Registration Council
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 October 2020
Case Number
18563/18
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Irregular Particulars of Claim Under Rule 30
Outcome
Application granted. Portions of the particulars of claim struck out as irregular. Plaintiffs granted leave to amend within 20 court days. Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs on attorney and client scale.
Judges
Norton
Legal Topics
Pleading Requirements, Irregular Step, Rule 18 Compliance, Damages Quantification
Civil Procedure Pleading Requirements Irregular Step Rule 18 Compliance Damages Quantification

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johannes Frederick Van Niekerk and 88 Others

Plaintiff

Premier of the Province of the Western Cape

Defendant

Municipality of Mossel Bay

Defendant

National Home Builders Registration Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Irregular Particulars of Claim Under Rule 30

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' particulars of claim comply with rule 18(4) and rule 18(10) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether the references to voluminous annexures and vague pleading constitute an irregular step.
  3. 3 Whether the damages claimed are pleaded with sufficient particularity to enable the defendants to reasonably assess quantum.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs' particulars of claim did not comply with rule 18(4) because they referred to voluminous annexures without identifying the material facts relied upon, resulting in vague and unclear pleadings. This caused significant prejudice to the defendants, who could not ascertain the case they had to meet. The particulars also failed to comply with rule 18(10) as the damages claimed were pleaded as estimates without itemisation or supporting information, making it impossible for the defendants to reasonably assess quantum. The plaintiffs' arguments that the application was moot due to a subsequent notice of intention to amend and that relief should not be sought...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Portions of the particulars of claim struck out as irregular. Plaintiffs granted leave to amend within 20 court days. Plaintiffs ordered to pay costs on attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • All annexures to the particulars of claim are struck out.
  • All references to annexures in the particulars of claim, including those in specified paragraphs, are struck out.