Lusaseni v Mashamaite (64478/2017)
Lusaseni v Mashamaite (64478/2017) [2024] ZAGPPHC 846 (26 August 2024)
The court found that the respondent's affidavit did not comply with Rule 35(3) because it failed to state unequivocally whether the respondent knew the whereabouts of the requested documents or to declare if such knowledge was lacking. The court rejected the respondent's argument that Rule 35(7) was applicable, holding that Rule 35(3) governs supplementation of inadequate discovery, not total failure to discover. The court also dismissed the procedural objection regarding the notice of motion, noting that the respondent was aware of the proceedings and had responded. Accordingly, the applicat…
Source excerpt
- Discovery Procedure
- Rule 35 Application
- Affidavit Compliance
- Default Judgment
- Costs Award