About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2024
>>
[2024] ZAGPJHC 110
|
|
Dovetail Prpoerties (Pty) Limited v Sibanye Stillwater Limited (00127/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 110 (12 February 2024)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Case Number:
00127/2021
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
_________________________
DATE
SIGNATURE
In
the matter between:
DOVETAIL
PRPOERTIES (PTY) LIMITED
Applicant
and
SIBANYE
STILLWATER LIMITED
Respondent
JUDGMENT
This
judgment has been delivered by being uploaded to the CaseLines
profile on and communicated to the parties by email.
Wepener,
J
[1]
This is a Commercial Court matter which is being conducted in term of
the Commercial
Court Practice Directive of this Division. In terms of
Chapter 4 paragraph 22 “No request for further particulars may
be
sought in the Commercial Court.”
[2]
Despite this provision, the applicant (defendant) has served and
filed a request for
particulars. Its heading indicates that the
request is in terms of Rule 21 read together with Chapter 4 paragraph
18. In my view,
the prohibition contained in the Commercial Court
Practice Directives negate a request for further particulars in terms
of Rule
21, which is ousted for the purposes of Commercial Court
matters.
[3]
The applicant further relies on the fact that Chapter 4 paragraph 18
provides that
“matters heard in the Commercial Court will be
dealt with in line with the broad principles of fairness, efficiency
and cost-effectiveness.”
[4]
This direction does not override the clear wording that “no
request for further
particulars may be sought . . .” (sic)
served “in the Commercial Court. . . .”
[5]
Unlike Chapter 5, in Rules 25 and 26, which also abolishes discovery
but does open
the door for some discovery, the rule against further
particulars does not leave the door open. I do not need to consider
whether
exceptional circumstances would permit the request for
further particulars as in this matter none such exceptional
circumstances
have been shown.
[6]
Some exceptional ground or reason may have to be shown in order to go
beyond the prohibition,
if it is to be relaxed, but the applicant has
not shown such exceptional circumstances. I note that the applicant
has filed an
extensive plea to issues raised in the particulars of
claim and it had the opportunity to raise two exceptions on two
different
occasions.
[7]
I am of the view that the result is that the extensive plea to the
particulars of
claim speaks against the need for further particulars.
[8]
This matter was referred to the
Commercial Court after pleadings had closed and the usual
Commercial
Court rules up to the close of pleadings did not apply, but, in my
view, the witness statements which are to be exchanged
and which
ordinarily constitute the evidence in chief, will address any
uncertainty which the applicant may have.
[9]
In the circumstances the following order is made:
The
request for further particulars is dismissed with costs which include
the costs of two counsel where two counsel were employed.
______________________________
Wepener
J
Heard:
12 February 2024
Delivered:
12 February 2024
For
the Applicant: Adv N. Luthuli
Instructed
by ENSAfrica
For
the Respondent: Adv P. Sais SC.
Instructed
by Weavind & Weavind Incorporated