South Africa Case Law

Blakes Mphanga Incorporated v Eagle Canyon Golf Estate Homeowners Association (2013/2686)

Blakes Mphanga Incorporated v Eagle Canyon Golf Estate Homeowners Association (2013/2686) [2013] ZAGPJHC 165 (1 July 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2013/2686

Judge

Weiner

The court dismissed Rule 30, Rule 30A, and security-for-costs applications, holding the pleaded documents were background facts, not contracts relied on.

• Rule 18 6 Pleading Requirements
• Security For Costs
• Authority Of Attorney
• Facta Probanda Vs Facta Probantia
• Delictual Liability
• Company Litigation

Moosa NO and Others v Hassam and Others (12256/08)

Moosa NO and Others v Hassam and Others (12256/08) [2009] ZAKZPHC 62; 2010 (2) SA 410 (KZP) (20 November 2009)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

12256/08

Judge

Swain

The court held that Rule 18(6) requires a party relying on a written contract to annex a true copy of the contract to its pleading. An allegation of non-possession does not constitute compliance with the rule nor does it excuse non-compliance. The respondents failed to seek condonation or provide facts explaining their inability to annex the agreement. Furthermore, evidence suggested that the respondents had received a copy of the agreement but did not annex it. The court concluded that the respondents must remedy the irregularity by annexing the contract within fifteen days, failing which th…

Source excerpt

• Rule 18 6 Pleading Requirements
• Irregular Proceedings
• Written Contracts
• Condonation Under Rule 27 3