Bindco (Pty) Limited and Others v Technologies Acceptances (Pty) Ltd (40187/2009) [2010] ZAGPPHC 196 (19 October 2010)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
40187/2009
Judge
BAM
The High Court found that the summons and particulars of claim amounted to a combined summons, and set aside the plaintiff’s notice of bar as irregular.
CTP Limited t/a Plasticwrap v Osmans Spice Works CC (15232/2007) [2008] ZAKZHC 105 (20 June 2008)
Court
High Courts - Kwazulu Natal
Case number
15232/2007
Judge
Msimang
The court held that a simple summons for a debt or liquidated demand need not comply with Rule 18, but must set out the claim with sufficient clarity. The defendant's affidavit failed to address material allegations regarding invoices and payment and was vague regarding the waybill. The submissions were not sufficiently detailed to constitute a bona fide defence. The defendant's resistance based on non-compliance with Rule 18 failed, and the affidavit did not meet the requirements of Rule 32(3)(b). Accordingly, summary judgment was granted in favour of the plaintiff.