Pleadings


AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN TERMS OF RULE 12(4)



Yüklə 1,13 Mb.
səhifə4/12
tarix17.08.2018
ölçüsü1,13 Mb.
#71685
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN TERMS OF RULE 12(4)


___________________________________________________________________________
I, the undersigned SPANNER KOEKEMOER hereby state under oath as follows:

1.

I am an adult male panelbeater that obtained my N3 Certificate in Panelbeating in 1980 and has worked as panel beater for my own account at "Spanner in the Works”, 10 Rose Ave, Mayville, Pretoria since 1981.



2.

I have 25 (Twenty Five) years experience in the repairs of petrol driven vehicles of various nature and is also acquainted with the costs of spares and related items and the standard tariffs for panelbeating labour and I am therefore competent to depose to this affidavit, the contents which fall in my personal knowledge and expertise.


3.

On 1 March 2006 I inspected the Plaintiff's vehicle, a Toyota Corolla, Registration Number XYZ456GP and found the following damage thereto, which damage, in my expert opinion, is consistent with damage sustained in a motor vehicle accident:

3.1 Front passenger door damaged beyond repair;

3.2 Damage to rear passenger door;

3.3 Damage to midpanel between two passenger doors.
4.

In accordance with my expert knowledge regarding repairs, cost of labour, prices of spares and related items, it is my opinion that the fair and reasonable costs of repairing the aforesaid damage will amount to R20 000,00, which amount is calculated as follows:


4.1 Removal and replacement of front passenger door:
R8 000,00: door

R1 000,00: labour

R1 000, 00: spray painting

4.2 Removal and replacement of midpanel:


R3 000,00: panel

R1 000,00: labour

R1 000, 00: spray painting
4.3 Repairs to rear passenger door:

R4 000,00: labour

R1 000,00: spray painting
Signed at Pretoria on this the ________day of ___________________ 2006.

________________________

Deponent

Signed and sworn to at Pretoria on ________________________ by the deponent who has stated that:


a He/She knows and understands the contents hereof and that it is true and correct;

b He/She has no objection to taking the prescribed oath; and

c That he/she regards the prescribed oath as binding on his/her conscience.
Signed before me,
COMMISSIONER OF OATHS:

SIGNATURE

FULL NAMES:

CAPACITY:

AREA:

BUSINESS ADDRESS:



SCENARIO THREE:

EXAMPLE 25

Application for summary judgment and opposing affidavit

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA

Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:
JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant

______________________________________________________________________________


APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

______________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that Plaintiff intends to apply to court on _________________at 09:00 or as soon thereafter as counsel for the Plaintiff may be heard, for an order against Defendant in the following terms:
1. Summary judgment in the amount of R20 000,00;

2. Interest on the above amount at 15,5% a tempore morae;

3 . Cost of suit.
Kindly further take notice that the Affidavit of JILL HILL, attached hereto, will serve to support this application.
Kindly place the matter on the roll accordingly.
Signed at Pretoria on this the ___ day of ______________ 2006
_______________________________

Johannes Voet

Attorneys for Plaintiff

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria


TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria


AND TO: Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

Received copy hereof on this the

_____ day of ________________ 2006

________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff

EXAMPLE 26
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA

Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:


JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant

______________________________________________________________________________


SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT

______________________________________________________________________________


I, the undersigned,

JILL HILL

hereby make oath and declare as follows:

1.

I am the Plaintiff in this matter and can swear positively to the facts contained herein which facts fall within my personal knowledge and are true and correct.


2.

I confirm that the cause of action and the amount as set out in the Summons are correct.


3.

I verily believe that the Defendant does not have a bona fide defence and has merely entered an appearance to defend for purposes of delay.


____________________________

DEPONENT

THUS SWORN AND SIGNED TO BEFORE ME, AT ___________________ ON THIS THE _______ DAY OF _____________________________ the Deponent having acknowledge that he knows and understands the contents of this affidavit and that he considers the oath to e binding on his conscience.

______________________________

COMMISSIONER OF OATHS

EXAMPLE 27
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA

Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:


JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant

_____________________________________________________________________________


OPPOSING AFFIDAVIT

_____________________________________________________________________________


I, the undersigned,

JIM SWIFT

herewith make oath and declare as follows:


1.

I am the Defendant in the above matter and the facts contained herein fall within my personal knowledge and are true and correct.


2.

I have read the affidavit by the Defendant and wish to reply thereto as follows:


2.1 POINT IN LIMING

I am advised by my legal representative that the Plaintiff's claim is for an unliquidated amount for damages allegedly suffered and does not fall within the scope of application of the Summary Judgment remedy. Argument on this issue will be advanced at the hearing of the application for Summary Judgment.


2.2 AD DEFENCE
I confirm that I indeed have a bona fide defence to Plaintiff's claim and that I have not entered an appearance to defend merely for purposes of delay.
2.2.1 The nature and grounds of my defence are that I deny that I was negligent and thus I also deny that I caused the plaintiff’s damages. My defence is that the negligent conduct of the plaintiff was the sole cause of the accident because she failed to keep a proper look-out in the wet and unpleasant weather circumstances on the appropriate day and also drove at an unreasonably high speed.
2.3 AD COUNTERCLAIM
As a result of plaintiff's negligence as aforesaid I have a bona fide counterclaim for
R10 000,00, being the fair, reasonable and necessary costs of repairing my vehicle to its pre-collision condition.
______________________________

DEPONENT
THUS SWORN AND SIGNED TO BEFORE ME AT ___________________ ON THIS THE _______ DAY OF _____________________________ the Deponent having acknowledge that he knows and understands the contents of this affidavit and that he considers the oath to be binding on his conscience.
______________________________

COMMISSIONER OF OATHS

CAPACITY:

ADDRESS


SCENARIO FOUR:

Where defendant request copies of accounts and documents in terms of rule 15(1)

EXAMPLE 28
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA


Case No. 1/2006
In the matter between:
JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant
_____________________________________________________________________________
NOTICE IN TERMS OF RULE 15(1)

_____________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that Defendant requests Plaintiff to furnish copies of all or any accounts or documents upon which the action is based to Defendant within 10 (ten) days after receipt hereof.
Signed at Pretoria on this the ___ day of ________________ 2006

_________________________

Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

(REF: G VAN WYK)

TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Johannes Voet

Attorneys for Plaintiff

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria


Received copy hereof on this the

_____day of ____________ 2006.


__________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff
EXAMPLE 29
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA


Case No. 1/2006
In the matter between:
JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant
_____________________________________________________________________________
PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S REQUEST IN TERMS OF RULE 15(1)

_____________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that due to the fact that plaintiff’s action is based on a motor vehicle collision, there are no accounts or documents upon which the action is based.
Signed at Pretoria on this the ___ day of ________________ 2006
_________________________

Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria


(REF: G VAN WYK)

TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Johannes Voet

Attorneys for Plaintiff

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

Received copy hereof on this the

_____day of ____________ 2006.
__________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SCENARIO FIVE:



Where plaintiff is a company, defendant would be able to request security for costs

EXAMPLE 30

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA
Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:


JILL HILL (PTY) LTD Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant
_____________________________________________________________________________
REQUEST FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS

IN TERMS OF RULE 62(1) OF ACT 32 OF 1944

_____________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that Defendant herewith requests that Plaintiff furnish to Defendant security for the costs of this action in the amount of R5 000,00 as the Plaintiff is an uncorporated company.
Signed at Pretoria on this the ___ day of _____________ 2006

_______________________________

Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Johannes Voet

Attorneys for Plaintiff

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

Received copy hereof on this the

_____ day of ________________ 2006
________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff



EXAMPLE 31
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA


Case No. 1/2006
In the matter between:
JILL HILL PLAINTIFF - RESPONDENT
and
JIM SWIFT DEFENDANT - APPLICANT
______________________________________________________________________________
NOTICE IN TERMS OF RULE 62(2)

______________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that Applicant intends to apply to the abovementioned Court on _________________at 09:00 for an order in the following terms:
a. That Respondent's action against Applicant be dismissed with costs due to Respondent's failure to furnish security for Applicant's costs in accordance with the requested dated ________________.

b. That Respondent be ordered to pay the costs of this application.


Signed at Pretoria on this the ___ day of __________________ 2006

_______________________________

Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Applicant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Johannes Voet

Attorneys for Respondent

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

Received copy hereof on this the

_____ day of _______________ 2006
________________________________

Attorneys for Respondent

SCENARIO SIX:

Where a party requests reason for the judgment and decides to appeal



EXAMPLE 32
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA

Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:


JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant

______________________________________________________________________________


REQUEST FOR REASONS FOR JUDGMENT I.T.O. RULE 51

______________________________________________________________________________


Be pleased to take notice that the Plaintiff in the above case hereby requests that the Honourable Magistrate Z, within 15 (Fifteen) days from receipt hereof, hand to the Clerk of the Court a written judgment in respect of the trial of the above case that took place on _______________ 2006, which judgment will form part of the record and must show:
a) the facts he found to be proved

and


b) his reasons for judgment.
Dated at Pretoria on this the ____ day of __________________ 2006
________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Johannes Voet

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria


TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria


Received copy hereof on this the

day of __________________ 2006

_________________________________

Attorneys for Defendant



SCENARIO SEVEN: NOTICE OF APPEAL

EXAMPLE 33
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PRETORIA

HELD AT PRETORIA

Case No. 1/2006

In the matter between:


JILL HILL Plaintiff
and
JIM SWIFT Defendant

______________________________________________________________________________


NOTICE OF APPEAL

______________________________________________________________________________


Kindly take notice that Plaintiff herewith notes an appeal to the Transvaal Provincial Division of the High Court against the whole of the judgment delivered by the Honourable Magistrate Z on _____________________in the above matter.
Further take notice that the appeal is based upon the following legal and factual grounds:
1. The honourable magistrate has erred by finding that the plaintiff did not prove his case, for the following reasons:


  1. The honourable court failed to give sufficient weight to the evidence of Mr Frik Vos who testified that shortly before the accident with plaintiff, the defendant overtook his vehicle at an excessive speed and sped on.

  2. The honourable court failed to make a finding that Mr James Carey, who was allegedly an eyewitness of the accident between the cars of plaintiff and defendant, was not a credible witness due to the following material contradictions in his testimony:

    1. He initially testified that the accident occurred at 13:00 on 1 March 2006 when he was on his way to buy lunch. During cross-examination he however testified that it occurred at 09:00 on 1 March 2006 when he was on his way to work.

    2. He initially testified that defendant drove a blue Nissan Hardbody. During cross-examination he testified that defendant drove a red Nissan Hardbody.

    3. He initially testified that plaintiff drove at a high speed and could not stop to prevent the accident. During cross-examination he however testified that she did not concentrate on the road as she was talking over a cell phone and thus could not stop timeously to prevent an accident.

Signed at Pretoria on this the ____ day of _________________ 2006


_____________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Johannes Voet

431 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria
TO: The Clerk of the Court

Pretoria
AND TO: Gaius Van Wyk

Attorneys for Defendant

10 Kirkness Street

Sunnyside

Pretoria

Received copy hereof on this the

day of _________________ 2006
_________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiff



PART II
THE ACTION PROCEDURE IN THE HIGH COURT
a) FRAMEWORK

Plaintiff issues Combined Summons (1)



Sheriff serves (2) Combined Summons on Defendant

Defendant serves Notice of Appearance to Defend (3)

Defendant delivers Plea (4) and Counterclaim (5)

Plaintiff delivers Replication (6)and Plea to Counterclaim (7)

CLOSE OF PLEADINGS



b) INTERIM STEPS THAT THE PARTIES CAN CONSIDER DURING THE PLEADING PHASE IN THE HIGH COURT:
I.r.o. 3:

Plaintiff can consider: - Summary Judgment



  • Provisional Sentence

  • Rule 30

Defendant can consider: - Rule 30



  • Exception

  • Security for Costs

- Special Plea
I.r.o. 4:

Plaintiff can consider: - Notice of Bar

(if Plea is late)

- Rule 30



  • Exception


I.r.o. 5:

Plaintiff can consider: - Exception

- Rule 30

- Security for Costs


I.r.o. 6:

Defendant can consider: - Rule 30

- Exception
I.r.o. 7:

Defendant can consider: - Notice of Bar

(if Plea is late)


(1) DAMAGES ACTION IN THE HIGH COURT

EXAMPLE 34

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION
Case Nr. 10/2006
In the ex parte application of:
JILL HILL Applicant
in re:
JACK HILL Patient

(hereinafter referred to as “the patient”)


for the appointment of a curator ad litem

_____________________________________________________________________________




Kataloq: Downloads

Yüklə 1,13 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2022
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə