South Africa Case Law

First Rand Bank Limited t/a RMB Private Bank and as FNB v Doola (13723/2020)

First Rand Bank Limited t/a RMB Private Bank and as FNB v Doola (13723/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 456 (11 May 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13723/2020

Judge

P Malungana

The court found that the respondent's rule 30 application was out of time and that the respondent had taken a further step in the proceedings by serving a rule 35(12) notice, which amounted to advancing the matter and acknowledging the impugned affidavits. As such, the respondent forfeited the right to bring the rule 30 application. Furthermore, both parties had filed affidavits late during the Covid-19 pandemic, but no prejudice was suffered as a result. The court held that the most appropriate remedy was to disregard the merits of the condonation applications and focus on the main applicati…

Source excerpt

• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Rule 35 Document Production
• Striking Out Affidavit
• Condonation
• Prejudice In Procedure

Transnet Limited v ERF 152927 Cape Town (PTY) Ltd : In re: ERF 152927 Cape Town (PTY) Ltd v Transnet Limited (35967/2010)

Transnet Limited v ERF 152927 Cape Town (PTY) Ltd : In re: ERF 152927 Cape Town (PTY) Ltd v Transnet Limited (35967/2010) [2022] ZAGPJHC 542 (29 July 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

35967/2010

Judge

ML Senyatsi

The court found that Transnet Limited's application for leave to amend its plea and file a counter-claim was brought in bad faith, with undue delay, and solely to frustrate the enforcement of a final and binding order (the Schabort order) that has stood unchallenged for 22 years. The court held that the amendment would cause significant prejudice to Erf 152927 Cape Town (PTY) Ltd, as key witnesses and documents are no longer available and memories have faded. The issues raised by Transnet have already been adjudicated and are precluded by the doctrine of res judicata. Transnet failed to disch…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Counter Claims
• Res Judicata
• Option To Purchase
• Prejudice In Procedure
• Specific Performance

Nel v Merchant Commercial Finance (Pty) Ltd t/a M Factors (9733/2009)

Nel v Merchant Commercial Finance (Pty) Ltd t/a M Factors (9733/2009) [2021] ZAGPPHC 587 (14 September 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

9733/2009

Judge

D Makhoba

The High Court refused to separate the validity of a deed of pledge from the main action, finding the issues unclear and likely to cause delay and prejudice.

• Separation Of Issues
• Uniform Rule 33 4
• Deed Of Pledge Validity
• Prejudice In Procedure
• Civil-procedure
• Separation-of-issues

Lockstock Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others v Peter Van Den Steen NO and Others (2020/12079)

Lockstock Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others v Peter Van Den Steen NO and Others (2020/12079) [2021] ZAGPJHC 896 (10 August 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/12079

Judge

N Ali

The court held that Lockstock had to obtain leave under section 133 before the BRPs were required to answer, and service on all affected parties had to be completed.

• Business Rescue
• Section 133 Companies Act
• Irregular Proceedings
• Joinder Of Parties
• Prejudice In Procedure
• Business-rescue

Ardnamurchan Estates (Pty) Limited v Renewables Cookhouse Wind Farms 1 (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Others (1408/2015)

Ardnamurchan Estates (Pty) Limited v Renewables Cookhouse Wind Farms 1 (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Others (1408/2015) [2020] ZAECGHC 132; [2021] 1 All SA 829 (ECG) (1 December 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

1408/2015

Judge

P N Kroon

The Court held that the Applicant, by delivering a replying affidavit to the answering affidavit, had taken a further step in the proceedings and thereby foregone its right to object to the late delivery of the answering affidavit. The delivery of affidavits out of time without condonation does not render them nullities if no prejudice is suffered and the interests of justice require their admission. The Court exercised its discretion to admit both the answering and replying affidavits, noting that all relevant documents were before it and the matter was ripe for hearing. The preliminary obje…

Source excerpt

• Late Filing Of Affidavits
• Condonation
• Locus Standi
• Acquisitive Prescription
• Mandamus
• Prejudice In Procedure

Tenke Fungurume Mining S.A.R.L v Armogan and Others (52161/2013, 42993/2013)

Tenke Fungurume Mining S.A.R.L v Armogan and Others (52161/2013, 42993/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1178 (22 September 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

52161/2013, 42993/2013

Judge

C Pretorius

The court granted condonation for a late replying affidavit, ordered the respondents’ defence struck out unless proper discovery was served, and compelled the applicant to make discovery available.

• Discovery Affidavit
• Condonation
• Striking Out Defence
• Attorney And Client Costs
• Rule 35 Uniform Rules
• Prejudice In Procedure

Absa Bank Ltd v Ms T van Rie t/a Amazing and Others (13800/2000)

Absa Bank Ltd v Ms T van Rie t/a Amazing and Others (13800/2000) [2010] ZAGPJHC 185 (8 June 2010)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13800/2000

Judges

A J Bester, Tsoka

The magistrate failed to exercise her discretion judicially by focusing solely on historical delay and not considering whether prejudice in the conduct of the action or defence would result from the amendment. The amendments sought were not frivolous, nor intended to delay or gain tactical advantage, and any prejudice could be cured by costs or postponement. The refusal to allow amendment and the subsequent dismissal of the action with costs were erroneous. The proper approach is to allow amendments that facilitate the real issues being determined, unless irremediable prejudice is shown. The…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Magistrates Court Rules
• Contract Enforcement
• Prejudice In Procedure