Sibandze v Africa Transaction Solution and Another (926 of 2012) [2012] SZHC 217 (17 September 2012)


IN THE HIGH COURT OF SWAZILAND



RULING

Case No: 926/2012

In the matter between:



MDUDUZI SIBANDZE APPLICANT


vs


AFRICA TRANSACTION SOLUTION 1ST RESPONDENT


KIA MOTORS (PTY) LTD 2ND RESPONDENT



Neutral citation: Mduduzi Sibandze vs Africa Transaction Solutions 926/2012 SZHC 217 (17th September 2012)


Coram: MAPHALALA PJ

Heard: 7TH SEPTEMBER 2012

Delivered: 17TH SEPTEMBER 2012


Summary: Application for summary judgment where Defendant’s attorney has withdrawn. The court rules that in the interest of justice Defendant be afforded the opportunity to file its opposing papers. Summary judgment being an extra-ordinary remedy. Respondent to pay wasted costs of the postponement





[1] Before court is an Application for summary judgment which has come unopposed as there are no opposing papers filed of record. However, when the matter was called Mr. Khoza intimated that he appeared for the Respondent and sought that the matter be postponed to allow his client to file the requisite papers in opposition.


[2] It was revealed further that Mr. Khoza had withdrawn as attorney of record for the Defendant. Then a tit for tat ensued as to the position of Mr. Khoza as he has withdrawn. Mr. Khoza urged the court to consider that summary judgment is an extra ordinary remedy that in the interest of justice the court ought to allow the Respondent to file his case in accordance with the Rules of Court.


[3] I have considered the pros and cons of the parties’ arguments and I have come to the view that Respondent be given the opportunity to file his case in the interest of justice as summary judgment is an extraordinary remedy. Further, I rule that the Respondent pays wasted costs of the day.




STANLEY B. MAPHALALA

PRINCIPAL JUDGE


FOR THE APPLICANT : MR. M. DLAMINI

FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR. S. KHOZA

3


▲ To the top