Menzin (Pty) Ltd v Edwin Construction (Pty) Ltd

• Jurisdiction: http://justis.com/jurisdiction/166,South Africa
• Judge: Cronjé AJ
• Judgment Date: 04 September 2023
• Citation: 2023 JDR 3319 (FB)
• Hearing Date: 11 August 2023
• Docket Number: 657/2023
• Court: Free State Division, Bloemfontein

Cronjé AJ:

[1]

The Plaintiff (“Menzin”) instituted action against the Defendant (“Edwin Construction”) and alleges that a written agreement was concluded for internal sewer and water reticulation. Edwin Construction took exception against the

2023 JDR 3319 p2

Cronjé AJ

particulars of claim and afforded it an opportunity to remedy the defects. Edwin Construction states that the claim is vague and embarrassing, does not disclose causes of action and that no allegations are made to bring the claim within this court’s jurisdiction. Menzin did not address any of the objections and Edwin Construction thereupon filed its exception.

[2]

I pause to state that Menzin’s attorneys, Siziba Attorneys, withdrew as attorneys of record and served the withdrawal on 2 August 2023. The Notice of set-down was served on Siziba Attorneys on 8 June 2023 via email. There was no appearance for Menzin when the matter was called.

[3]

Mr Francis Ntsane Menyau eventually arrived and I enquired about his intentions. He indicated that he represents Menzin and that Menzin’s attorneys informed him that he must come to Court as the matter is on the roll. He indicated that he intends obtain a new lawyer. I informed him that if Edwin Construction succeeds on any of the grounds of exception, Menzin will still have an opportunity to amend its papers and the doors to Court would not be closed to it.

[4]

He informed me that I may continue to hear the matter and I requested him to provide his full details to Edwin Construction’s attorney who was in Court. I thereupon continued to hear the application. Edwin Construction in any event has to convince me that there is a basis for the exception. I refer to the numbers of the grounds as they appear in the exception.

[5]

Menzin refers to four (4) types of work it had to perform in terms of a written agreement which it attaches as Annexure “M1”. It alleges that it performed the works and from time to time submitted invoices for the work done.

[6]

It furthermore alleges that on 13 January 2022, it approached Edwin Construction for a contract review and that in pursuance of the review it was revealed that Menzin was underpaid. It claims an amount of R1 472 094.56

2023 JDR 3319 p3

Cronjé AJ

plus interest and costs.

[7]

Mr K Naidoo, credit to him, who appeared for Edwin Construction, abandoned the first and second grounds of exception.

[8]

The third and fifth grounds of exception can be joined together. Edwin Construction states that no cause of...