Andrade v Road Accident Fund (1566/2013)
Andrade v Road Accident Fund (1566/2013) [2013] ZAFSHC 72 (16 May 2013)
The court held that the applicant was entitled to enforce the terms of the pre-trial minute, which constituted a binding agreement between the parties. The facts of this case were distinguishable from Kriel v Bowels, where no pre-trial conference had been held and no agreement existed. Here, the respondent had agreed to provide discovery and answers by a specified date but failed to comply. The court found that compelling compliance with the pre-trial agreement was competent and necessary to ensure the expeditious resolution of the dispute and the integrity of the pre-trial process.
Source excerpt
- Pre Trial Agreement
- Rule 37 Compliance
- Discovery Affidavit
- Compelling Production Of Documents