Nobandu General Trading (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 3318 (FB)
• Hearing Date: 11 August 2023
• Docket Number: 658/2023
• Court: Free State Division, Bloemfontein

Cronjé AJ:

2023 JDR 3318 p2

Cronjé AJ

[1]

The Plaintiff (“Nobandu”) 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 particulars 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. Nobandu did not address any of the objections and Edwin Construction thereupon filed its exception. I refer to the numbers of the grounds as they appear in the exception.

[2]

I pause to state that Nobandu’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. I continued to hear the application as Edwin Construction in any event has to convince me that there is a basis for the exception and the result would not close the doors of the court to Nobandu.

[3]

Nobandu refers to four (4) types of work it had to perform in terms of a written agreement. It alleges that it performed the works and from time to time submitted invoices for the work done.

[4]

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 Nobandu was underpaid. It claims an amount of R1 629 295.65 plus interest and costs.

[5]

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

2023 JDR 3318 p3

Cronjé AJ

[6]

The third and fifth grounds of exception can be joined together. Edwin Construction states that no cause of action is disclosed as there is no averment as to how, when and where the works were to be completed or by whom; no averment as to the obligations pertaining to invoicing and/or remuneration is alleged; who would be responsible for remuneration; how and when such remuneration would become due, owing and payable; when, where and how and by whom such works were completed; when, where and in what manner Nobandu invoiced Edwin Construction for the works performed; and in what manner Edwin Construction allegedly breached the terms of the agreement. [1] Nobandu also fails to plead the exact basis of damages suffered. This has to...