- Flynote
-
Civil Procedure and Practice – an order amending the
quantification of the claim in a summons did not amount to a new cause of actionand did not constitute a final determination on the issue of the court’s jurisdiction to
adjudicate the action – an order amending the description of a defendant in a
summons does not amount to a substitution of the defendant in circumstances
where the description of the defendant was the same as in the lease agreement
concluded by the parties – no prejudice was demonstrated by the appellant –
application to amend was correctly granted – appeal dismissed.
Loading PDF...
This document is 464.8 KB. Do you want to load it?
Cited documents 4
Judgment 3
- Blaauwberg Meat Wholesalers CC v Anglo Dutch Meats (Exports) Ltd (442/2002) [2003] ZASCA 144 (28 November 2003)
- Foxlake Investments (Pty) Ltd t/a Foxway Developments (Pty) Ltd v Ultimate Raft Foundation Design Solutions CC t/a Ultimate Raft Design and Another (144/2015) [2016] ZASCA 54 (1 April 2016)
- Trencon Construction (Pty) Ltd v Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited and Another [2015] ZACC 22 (26 June 2015)
Legislation 1
Documents citing this one 3
Judgment 3
- Commissioner for South African Revenue Service v Free State Development Corporation (1222/21) [2023] ZASCA 84 (31 May 2023)
- Free State Wheels (Pty) Ltd v WRC Rentals (Pty) Ltd and Others (2014/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 71 (14 March 2024)
- Isago at N12 Development (Pty) Ltd v PKX Capital (Pty) Ltd; In Re: PKX Capital (Pty) Ltd v Isago at N12 Development (Pty) Ltd (87615/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 1088 (9 December 2022)