Yield WTP (Edms) Bpk t.a Novan WTP v Laufs (730/2014) [2016] ZANWHC 70 (15 December 2016)

Yield WTP (Edms) Bpk t.a Novan WTP v Laufs (730/2014) [2016] ZANWHC 70 (15 December 2016)

The court held that rectification is only available for contractual documents and not for delivery notes, which are not contracts but documents created subsequent to the conclusion of the contract. The plaintiff's claim for rectification of delivery notes is therefore impermissible and fails to disclose a cause of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] ZANWHC 70
Parties
Plaintiff: Yield WTP (Edms) Bpk t/a Novan WTP; Defendant: Marthinus Johannes Laufs
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 December 2016
Case Number
730/2014
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception upheld; plaintiff ordered to pay costs and granted ten court days to amend particulars of claim.
Judges
R D Hendricks
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Rectification, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Cause of Action, Contractual Documents
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Exception Procedure Rectification Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Cause of Action Contractual Documents

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yield WTP (Edms) Bpk t/a Novan WTP

Plaintiff

Marthinus Johannes Laufs

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Exception to Amended Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing and fail to disclose a cause of action.
  2. 2 Whether rectification can be granted in respect of delivery notes rather than contractual documents.
  3. 3 Whether contradictions between the particulars of claim and supporting documents render the claim excipiable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that rectification is only available for contractual documents and not for delivery notes, which are not contracts but documents created subsequent to the conclusion of the contract. The plaintiff's claim for rectification of delivery notes is therefore impermissible and fails to disclose a cause of action. Furthermore, the amended particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing due to contradictions between the allegations and the documents relied upon, including inconsistencies in the names of the entities and the absence of necessary details on the delivery notes. The written terms and conditions exclude any oral agreement, making the plaintiff's reliance on a partly...

Court Disposition

Exception upheld; plaintiff ordered to pay costs and granted ten court days to amend particulars of claim.

Orders

  • The exception by the defendant (excipient) is upheld.
  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the costs of the exception.