South Africa Case Law

Spar Group Ltd v Hard As Nails (Pty) Ltd and Others - Rule 30(1) Application (3274/2022; 3752/2022)

Spar Group Ltd v Hard As Nails (Pty) Ltd and Others - Rule 30(1) Application (3274/2022; 3752/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 199 (10 August 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

3274/2022; 3752/2022

Judge

LekhULENI

The court held that a notice in terms of Rule 23(1)(a) is not a pleading and cannot serve as a proper response to a notice of bar under Rule 26. The simultaneous delivery of a plea and a notice of exception is procedurally improper, as an exception is intended to be delivered when a defendant is unable to plead. The respondents' delivery of both documents rendered the exception meaningless and irregular. The court found that the applicant was prejudiced by the irregular step, as it was compelled to respond to a defective process. The respondents' argument that the applicant should have ignore…

Source excerpt

• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Notice Of Exception
• Pleadings
• Notice Of Bar
• Rule 23 Exception

Kaap Agri Bedryf Limited and Another v Melaplastics Proprietary Limited and Another; In re Kaap Agri Bedryf Limited and Another v Melaplastics Proprietary Limited and Another (12310/2021)

Kaap Agri Bedryf Limited and Another v Melaplastics Proprietary Limited and Another; In re Kaap Agri Bedryf Limited and Another v Melaplastics Proprietary Limited and Another (12310/2021) [2023] ZAWCHC 7 (19 January 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

12310/2021

Judge

Wathen-Falken

The High Court granted leave to amend particulars of claim and dismissed an exception alleging vagueness and embarrassment in a commercial contract dispute.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Exception Vague And Embarrassing
• Breach Of Contract
• Damages
• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 28 Amendment

Labucon Resources (Pty) Ltd v Nikkel Trading 179 (Pty) Ltd (5518/2021)

Labucon Resources (Pty) Ltd v Nikkel Trading 179 (Pty) Ltd (5518/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 781 (20 October 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

5518/2021

Judge

Strijdom

The court held that a notice of exception is a proper response to a notice of bar and that the contrary view would defeat the purpose of excepting to a pleading. The authorities in this division support the entitlement of a party to except to a pleading alleged to be vague and embarrassing, even after the expiry of the initial period for filing a plea. The court found that the Defendant's notice of exception was not irregular and dismissed the Plaintiff's application under Rule 30(2).

Source excerpt

• Rule 30 Irregular Steps
• Rule 23 Exception
• Notice Of Bar
• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading

Barnes and Another v Kushite Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (27427/19)

Barnes and Another v Kushite Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (27427/19) [2022] ZAGPPHC 491 (12 July 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

27427/19

Judge

Barnes AJ

The court held that, in accordance with the weight of authority and the binding judgment in Tuffsan Investments, a notice delivered in terms of Rule 23(1) within the period stipulated in a notice of bar constitutes a valid procedural response. The alternative construction, as endorsed by McNally and Tracey Hill, was rejected as it prioritizes form over substance and undermines the purpose of the rules, which is to facilitate the resolution of disputes. The February notice was therefore a valid response, and the plaintiffs were not entitled to apply for default judgment. Their application for…

Source excerpt

• Rule 23 Exception
• Notice Of Bar
• Default Judgment
• Irregular Step
• Rule 30 Application

Van den Heever N.O and Others v Potgieter N.O and Others (2200/2021)

Van den Heever N.O and Others v Potgieter N.O and Others (2200/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 70; 2022 (6) SA 315 (FB) (4 March 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2200/2021

Judge

Van Zyl

The court found that the defendants failed to file their Rule 23 notice within the 10-day period prescribed by the amended Rule 23(1)(a). No condonation was sought for this non-compliance. The delivery of the Rule 23 notice after the notice of bar constituted an irregular step. The court exercised its discretion under Rule 30(3) to set aside the irregular step, noting that the plaintiffs would suffer prejudice if the notice were allowed to stand, as it would prevent them from obtaining relief such as default judgment. The reasoning in Hill N.O. v Brown, which applied the amended Rule 23(1), w…

Source excerpt

• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 26 Notice Of Bar
• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Amendment Of Rules
• Condonation

Vox Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd v Bridge Collections (Pty) Ltd (79806/2018)

Vox Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd v Bridge Collections (Pty) Ltd (79806/2018) [2022] ZAGPPHC 19 (11 January 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

79806/2018

Judge

Tlhapi V V

The High Court upheld an exception to particulars of claim for vagueness and embarrassment, and ordered the plaintiff to amend its pleadings within 15 days.

• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading
• Rule 23 Exception
• Amendment Of Particulars Of Claim
• Civil-procedure
• Exception
• Vague-and-embarrassing-pleading

City of Cape Town v ICT Works (Pty) Ltd (8049/19)

City of Cape Town v ICT Works (Pty) Ltd (8049/19) [2021] ZAWCHC 153 (11 August 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8049/19

Judge

Kusevitsky

High Court dismissed a Rule 30 application challenging a composite Rule 23 and Rule 30 notice and later exception in a MyCiti bus fare system dispute.

• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Vague And Embarrassing
• Pleading Particularity
• Civil-procedure
• Rule-23-exception

OOS Vrystaat Kaap Operations Ltd v Frelon Boerdery (Pty) Ltd & others (2496/2020)

OOS Vrystaat Kaap Operations Ltd v Frelon Boerdery (Pty) Ltd & others (2496/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 127 (20 April 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2496/2020

Judge

Molitsoane

The court found a notice of bar was served too early after an exception was withdrawn, making it a nullity and defeating the default judgment application.

• Notice Of Bar
• Default Judgment
• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 22 Plea
• Amendment Of Particulars
• Default-judgment

Roadmac Surfacing (Pty) Ltd v Sumeil (Pty) Ltd and Another (1403/2020)

Roadmac Surfacing (Pty) Ltd v Sumeil (Pty) Ltd and Another (1403/2020) [2021] ZAKZPHC 74 (23 February 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

1403/2020

Judge

Mossop AJ

The court found that the directives issued by the KZN Judge President suspending time limits during the COVID-19 lockdown were valid administrative acts and remained effective until set aside by a competent court. As a result, the plaintiff's notice of bar was delivered one day prematurely, since the dies non ended on 30 April 2020 and the defendants had until 7 May 2020 to file their plea. Without a valid notice of bar, the defendants were not under bar when they delivered their rule 23 notice, which was therefore properly delivered. The plaintiff's application to set aside the rule 23 notic…

Source excerpt

• Dies Non
• Notice Of Bar
• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Condonation
• Administrative Directives

Minister of Finance v Public Protector and Others (15862/2019)

Minister of Finance v Public Protector and Others (15862/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 804; 2022 (1) SA 244 (GP) (31 August 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

15862/2019

Judge

Kathree-Setiloane

The court held that a rule 6(5)(d)(iii) notice is not a pleading as contemplated by rule 23(1) of the Uniform Rules of Court. It is merely a notice indicating the respondent's intention to rely on points of law that may be dispositive of the dispute. Since it is neither a pleading nor an affidavit, it is impermissible to raise an exception against such a notice. The Minister's exception was therefore incompetent and bad in law. Once the rule 6(5)(d)(iii) notice was served, the matter was ready to be set down for hearing on the points of law. The court dismissed the exception and found that a…

Source excerpt

• Rule 23 Exception
• Rule 6 5 D Iii Notice
• Pleadings Vs Notices
• Remedial Action Review
• Personal Costs Orders