UNIVERSITY OF LIMPOPO

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND LAW

SCHOOL OF LAW

DEPARTMENT OF JURISPRUDENCE LEGAL PLURALISM, CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE

DEGREE AND DIPLOMA MAIN EXAMINATION OCT/NOV: 2021

MODULE: CCIA 032 PAPER: P1

(CIVIL PROCEDURE B)

TIME: 4 HOURS MARKS: 100

EXAMINER: ADV. WH YOUNG

SECOND EXAMINER: PROF AM ANDERSON

THIS PAPER CONSISTS OF …4…PAGES INCLUDING COVER PAGE

INSTRUCTIONS:

Once you start the assessment you have to complete it.

You will have four hours’ time from the moment that you start the assessment until it will
automatically submit.
Ensure that you have a stable and reliable internet connection BEFORE you start because if you lose
the connection the computer will submit whatever you have completed at that stage as your test
answer.
Also make sure when loadshedding will be in your area and do not attempt the test during such time
as you may not be able to complete it and will only get credit for what was submitted.
You may consult your class notes and textbook during the test.  You may NOT receive assistance
from anyone else or write off from anyone.  Be aware that Blackboard automatically compare
answers and notify your lecturers when copying occurred. 
 CCIA 032 OCT/NOV MAIN EXAMINATION 2021

Question 1

1.1 What attributes must a document have to qualify as a liquid document?

(5)

1.2 What attributes must judgment have to be appealable?

(5)

[10]
Question 2

Bos Baloyi had sued Carl Cutters in the Magistrates’ Court Polokwane for the amount of R198 345.98
for goods sold and delivered. The Magistrate dismissed his claim based on the provisions of the ‘old’
Rule 41(c) of the Magistrates’ Court Rules. The Magistrate was wrong as the Magistrates’ Court
Rules have been substantially amended in 2010 and the Magistrate’s finding based on the old Rule
41(c) was fundamentally wrong because the Rule 41(c) has been repealed (deleted) from the new
rules and substituted by Rule 41A, which was implemented in October 2010.

Advise Baloyi as to what legal remedies are available to him. Your answer must
include a discussion of the steps that must be followed to bring the matter to court as well as the
essential information must be contained in the founding papers.
[25]

Question 3

You are an advocate. An attorney, Daniel Dlamini from the firm Dlamini and Naidoo Attorneys,
consults with you for advice. He represents a certain Koos Kokkers, and he had issued summons
against Jetkor (Pty) Ltd for breach of contract. What has happened is that Kokkers is a property
owner who makes a living by letting various properties for an income. He let an office space to Jetkor
who used it to conduct business as a Crazy Store on the premises rented from Kokkers. The contract
was valid from 01 January 2015 to 31 December 2020. During November 2020 the parties discussed
the renewal of the contract, and they signed a new contract to be valid from 01 January 2021 to 31
December 2024. After consensus on the terms of the contract was reached, Kokkers’s attorney
drafted the new (second) contract, he signed it and send it to the Jetkor head office in Johannesburg,
where it was signed by a duly representative of Jetkor and returned to Kokkers. However, there was
a mistake on the contract and Kokkers made the necessary amendment, initialed it, and send it back
to Johannesburg to be initialed by the Jetkor representative. However, the (second) contract was
never send back to Kokkers. On the 21 st of March 2021, he received a letter from Jetkor, informing
him that the company has decided to close this particular Crazy Store due to operational reasons,
and they will vacate the premises on the last day of July 2021. Kokkers told them that it was
unacceptable as there was a valid and binding contract that expires on the 31 st of December 2024.
The representative of Jetkor denies that the company has ever entered into such agreement, and
reiterate that they will continue to cease business, and evacuate the premises by the end of July
2021, which they did. Kokkers does not have a copy of the (second) contract, and requested Jetkor
for the original (second) contract, or at least a certified copy thereof. Jetkor persists with its denial of
the existence of such (second) contract.

3.1 As Kokkers will not be able to establish/prove his claim against Jetkor without the (second)
contract, advise Dlamini what the appropriate course of action will be to take in the
2|Page
 CCIA 032 OCT/NOV MAIN EXAMINATION 2021

circumstances to get hold of the (second) contract, and also what he has to show in his
founding papers. (10)

3.2 Assuming the court grants Kokkers the relief sought in 3.1 above, what options are available
to Jetkor specifically relating to such relief? (5)

[15]

Question 4

Piet Plooimans issued summons against a certain Slinger Sing on the grounds that Plooiman sold a
Mercedes Benz CLA to Sing for the sum of R550 000.00. After paying only R150 000.00 Sing did not
make any further payments to Plooimans. The action succeeded in the High Court and Plooimans
obtained judgment for the payment of R400 000.00 with interest and costs. After due demand Sing
failed to make any payment Plooimans obtained a writ of execution. Upon investigation it appears
that Sing does not have liquid assets to satisfy the judgment, his immovable property is mortgaged
far exceeding the market value of the immovable property, the Mercedes was written off in an
accident, and the Toyota Hilux bakkie he is driving is under hire purchase from ABSA vehicle finance,
and he owes the bank more than the value of the vehicle. However, investigations revealed that Sing
is a shareholder in a company, ABC Logistics (Pty) Ltd, and he has an interest in a close corporation,
Exstios CC, and both entities seem to be solvent and are doing financially quite well. In the light of
the facts of the case, fully describe the conditions that the sheriff must comply with to attach Sing’s
shares in the company and his interest in the close corporation.
[20]

Question 5

Piet Pens he had purchased a second hand Volkswagen Polo from a certain Slegter Skinners for an
amount of R65 000.00. Upon taking possession of the Polo he realised that there are some serious
problems with the vehicle’s gearbox, and that the gearbox would have to be replaced. He was quite
upset because Skinners had given him the assurance the vehicle was in good order. He decided that
he was going to deduct the amount of R35 000 from the purchase price, as that is the price to fit a
new gearbox to the Polo, and he paid Skinners only R30 000. Skinners was not happy with the
situation at all and told Pens that if he doesn’t pay him the full balance by the end of the week, he will
ask his son Slegterers, who is an attorney, to issue summons against him (Pens) for the return of the
vehicle, and also to claim for damages for inconvenience caused, the price for a new gearbox, as
well as an order to retain the R30 000 that Pens had already paid Skinners. Pens wants you to obtain
an interdict to prevent Skinners to institute action on the grounds stated. By applying each of the
requirements for an
interim interdict to the facts of the case, discuss whether Pens has any prospects for successfully
applying for an interim interdict. You are expected to refer to relevant case law.
[20]

Question 6

Jerry Jantjies is married to Jenny Jantjies for nine years, but the marriage has broken down, and the
parties have separated two months ago. Jerry has issued summons against Jenny for a decree of
divorce, as well as for sole custody of their four minor children. Jenny is employed as a sales lady at
Game Stores and her monthly income is R14 500, while Jerry is a director on the board of directors
of MTN South Africa and his monthly income is R95 000. Jenny obviously doesn’t want Jerry to have
3|Page
 CCIA 032 OCT/NOV MAIN EXAMINATION 2021

custody of the children, and primarily for that reason she defends the action. Her problem is that she
doesn’t have the financial resources to afford a good lawyer. Her lawyer advised her to apply for
interim relief pending judgment. One morning while at work, the sheriff served a notice in accordance
with Form 17, in terms of Rule 43(2) of the High Court Rules, on Jerry in which Jenny claims interim
payment of R100 000 as a contribution to her legal costs.

By applying the provisions of Rule 43(3) and 43(4) of the High Court Rules, explain to Jerry what
he should do if he wants to oppose the application, when it must be done, and the effect and
subsequent consequences thereof if he opposes the application, and alternatively, the consequences
if he fails to give a reply.
[10]

TOTAL: 100

*******************************************************************************************************************
END

4|Page