South Africa Case Law

Cornelius Amos Peterson t/a Peterson Quantity Surveying and Project Management v Minister of Public Works (Appeal) (1423/2010)

Cornelius Amos Peterson t/a Peterson Quantity Surveying and Project Management v Minister of Public Works (Appeal) (1423/2010) [2024] ZANCHC 120 (15 November 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1423/2010

Judges

Mamosebo, Lever, Nxumalo

The Full Court granted leave to amend pleadings, finding the change corrected a misdescription of the defendant rather than substituting a new party.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Prescription Act
• Costs Award
• Civil-procedure
• Amendment-of-pleadings

Ngubo v Tshepang Contractors And Trading CC and Others (3967/2018)

Ngubo v Tshepang Contractors And Trading CC and Others (3967/2018) [2023] ZAFSHC 149 (2 May 2023)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3967/2018

Judge

Daniso

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside a substitution order, upheld a counter-application to correct a party citation, and awarded costs against the applicant.

• Joinder And Substitution Of Parties
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Setting Aside Orders
• Sale Of Business
• Condonation
• Joinder-and-substitution-of-parties

Leopont 461 CC and Another v Ringane and Others (3633/2021)

Leopont 461 CC and Another v Ringane and Others (3633/2021) [2021] ZALMPPHC 51 (1 July 2021)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

3633/2021

Judge

M V Semenya

The court found that the misdescription of the applicant was a mere error and did not prejudice the respondents, as the true entity was identifiable from the documents and common cause facts. The challenge to locus standi was dismissed because the deponent had authority via a registered power of attorney, and respondents failed to follow the prescribed procedure under Rule 7. The applicants established a prima facie right to the properties and timber, and the respondents' breaches of the agreements were proven by failure to pay deposits, rental, and unauthorized sales. Urgency was established…

Source excerpt

• Interim Interdict
• Urgent Application
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Locus Standi
• Breach Of Contract
• Restoration Of Possession

Tusk Construction Support Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v Independent Development Trust (364/2019)

Tusk Construction Support Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v Independent Development Trust (364/2019) [2020] ZASCA 22 (25 March 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

364/2019

Judges

Petse, Zondi, Dlodlo, Mbatha, Gorven

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the citation of a trust as a party to legal proceedings does not render the summons a nullity. The error is one of misdescription, not substance, and can be cured by amendment to substitute the trustees in their representative capacity. The claim remains unchanged, and no real prejudice is suffered by the respondent, especially as prescription was interrupted by the original summons. The opposition to the amendment was unreasonable, and the costs of the application for amendment should be borne by the respondent. The High Court's failure to provide reason…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Trusts And Trustees
• Juristic Personality
• Costs Orders

Rhegium Properties (Edms) Bpk and Another v Groenewald and Others (1005/13, 1006/13)

Rhegium Properties (Edms) Bpk and Another v Groenewald and Others (1005/13, 1006/13) [2017] ZANCHC 14 (20 January 2017)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1005/13, 1006/13

Judge

Lever AJ

The court held that a combined summons is read as a composite document, so proposed amendments correcting party descriptions were allowed.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Substitution Of Parties
• Uniform Rules Of Court
• Costs Award
• Civil-procedure

Rocla (Pty) Ltd v Burden & Swart Attorneys and Others (21573/2014)

Rocla (Pty) Ltd v Burden & Swart Attorneys and Others (21573/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 676 (29 July 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

21573/2014

Judge

C.P. Rabie

The court allowed an amendment correcting the applicant’s misdescription after a company name change and dismissed the second respondent’s Rule 35 discovery application.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Discovery In Motion Proceedings
• Rule 35 Procedure
• Civil-procedure
• Amendment-of-pleadings

Huisman and Another v Lakie and Others, In re: Huisman and Another v Lakie and Others (3248/10)

Huisman and Another v Lakie and Others, In re: Huisman and Another v Lakie and Others (3248/10) [2012] ZAECGHC 71 (6 September 2012)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

3248/10

Judge

M Makaula

The court found that the name of the second defendant was an amalgam of the second and third respondents, arising from the newspaper's representation. The summons was served on the respondents' attorneys, who appreciated their connection with the claim, satisfying the requirements for service on the true debtor under the Prescription Act. The amendment sought does not introduce new entities but corrects a misdescription. No prejudice or injustice to the respondents was established. The applicants are granted leave to amend the summons and particulars of claim, but must bear the wasted costs o…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Joinder Of Parties
• Prescription Act
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Estoppel

Makoba v Van Tonder (408/2001)

Makoba v Van Tonder (408/2001) [2001] ZAECHC 1 (1 January 2001)

Court

High Courts - Eastern Cape

Case number

408/2001

Judges

JW Pickering, N Goso

The court held that the joinder of Mrs. Makoba as second defendant and the amendment to the particulars of claim merely corrected a misdescription of the executor of the deceased estate and did not constitute the substitution of a new defendant. The action was always intended against the representative of the estate, and no prejudice was occasioned to the appellant by the correction. Furthermore, the court found that the plaintiff, armed with the formal communication from Legatus Trust, acted reasonably and was not required to make further inquiries into the identity of the executor. The appe…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Misdescription Of Parties
• Joinder Of Parties
• Reasonable Care In Ascertainment
• Special Plea Of Prescription