{"issue_text":"Whether applicant is making out a new case in the answering affidavit","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Contents of answering affidavit"}
{"issue_text":"Whether there are material disputes of fact","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Length of affidavits, nature of dispute"}
{"issue_text":"Whether 5th respondent exists in the manner it was cited","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Citation of 5th respondent as \"Price water house Coopers South Africa\""}
{"issue_text":"Whether 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents can be sued in this jurisdiction","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Respondents are South African companies"}
{"issue_text":"Whether there is a cause cognisable under section 14 of the High Court Act","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Nature of declaratory relief sought"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Applicant sought a declaratory order that a forensic audit report conducted by the 4th and 5th respondents on the affairs of 1st and 2nd respondents be declared unlawful. The respondents raised five preliminary points in limine seeking dismissal of the application.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases