This is an AI-generated summary of a selected monitored public legal source and may omit context. It is general information only, not legal advice, and is not a substitute for reading the source or consulting an attorney.
AI summary
The judgment concerns an appeal about an application to strike out alleged new facts in a replying affidavit and a dispute about an alleged oral agreement to share a project management fee equally. The court found the replying affidavit material was a response to issues raised in the answering affidavit, and it dismissed the appeal.
It may be relevant to motion proceedings, replying affidavits, and disputes of fact in the Western Cape High Court.
Evidence from source
Summary : Appeal – Application to strike out alleged new facts in the replying affidavit– Such facts in replying affidavit amount to a genuine answer to the defence raised in the answering affidavit
Supports: plain_summary: the appeal concerned a strike out application and replying affidavit material
The issue for determination is whether the court a quo was correct in finding that an oral agreement was reached between Mr Van Lamp and Mr Jackson to share the project management fee equally.
Supports: plain_summary: the appeal also concerned the alleged oral agreement to share the fee equally
The appeal is hereby dismissed.
Supports: plain_summary: the outcome of the appeal