THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
| Thabakholo Landscaping (Pty) Ltd v Hydromulch (Pty) and Another | |
|
|
|
| Supreme Court of Appeal -496/05 | Hearing date: 16 November 2006 |
| Judgment date: 30 November 2006 | |
Where an exception to a pleading is taken on the basis that the pleading discloses no cause of action, the exception will not succeed unless no cause of action is disclosed on all reasonable constructions of the pleading in question. |
|
Media Summary of Judgment |
|
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) today reversed a decision of the Pretoria High Court in a contractual dispute worth R14 919 019.92. The Pretoria High court upheld the objection by Hydromulch to a proposed amendment to Thabakholo’s counterclaim, on the grounds that it would lack averments to sustain a cause of action. The SCA ruled that the contract in question was arguably open to the interpretation that Thabakholo contends for. On that basis, said the SCA, it would have been prudent for the Pretoria High court to allow the dispute to stand over for decision at the trial. The SCA ordered Hydromulch to pay the costs of the appeal. |
|