(c) grant assistance in defraying expenditure incurred in connection with the rendering of any relevant health service; and/or agreement with, the Scheme; (d) render a relevant health service, either by the Scheme itself, or by any supplier or group of suppliers of a relevant health service or by any person in association with, or in terms of an agreement with, the Scheme.” Having summarised the background and issues for consideration on the pleadings, I now deal with the defendant’s grounds of exception. The ground relates to the fact that the written agreement was not stamped as required in terms of sections 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Stamp Duties Act, Act No 15 of 1993 (“the Stamp Act”). The defendant disputes the plaintiffs’ entitlement to produce the written agreement in evidence or to make the document available to any court of law and places the responsibility of stamping the agreement on the plaintiffs. Consequently, the defendant submits that the particulars of claim do not disclose a cause of action. The second ground of exception is based on an allegation contained in paragraph 7 of the particulars of claim. In this paragraph the plaintiffs allege that and following the winding up of Renaissance the liabilities of Renaissance “upon exceeded R5 million and as at December 2007 its liabilities were R62,838,774.00”. (emphasis supplied) The defendant also made reference to the allegation in paragraph 6.1 of the particulars of claim, to the effect that defendant agreed to provide a financial “the guarantee to Renaissance and to that end bound itself as guarantor and co-principal debtor for the proper execution by Renaissance of all its liabilities under the Medical (emphasis supplied) The basis of the exception, as I Schemes Act 1998.” understand it, is that the plaintiffs failed to make the allegation that the amount claimed in the action is a liability as envisaged in paragraph 6.1 of the particulars of claim (i.e. a liability under the Act). This, according to the defendant is an
(c) grant assistance in defraying expenditure incurred in connection with the rendering of any relevant health service; and/or agreement with, the Scheme; (d) render a relevant health service, either by the Scheme itself, or by any supplier or group of suppliers of a relevant health service or by any person in association with, or in terms of an agreement with, the Scheme.” Having summarised the background and issues for consideration on the pleadings, I now deal with the defendant’s grounds of exception. The ground relates to the fact that the written agreement was not stamped as required in terms of sections 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Stamp Duties Act, Act No 15 of 1993 (“the Stamp Act”). The defendant disputes the plaintiffs’ entitlement to produce the written agreement in evidence or to make the document available to any court of law and places the responsibility of stamping the agreement on the plaintiffs. Consequently, the defendant submits that the particulars of claim do not disclose a cause of action. The second ground of exception is based on an allegation contained in paragraph 7 of the particulars of claim. In this paragraph the plaintiffs allege that “upon and following the winding up of Renaissance the liabilities of Renaissance exceeded R5 million and as at December 2007 its liabilities were R62,838,774.00”. (emphasis supplied) The defendant also made reference to the allegation in paragraph 6.1 of the particulars of claim, to the effect that “the defendant agreed to provide a financial guarantee to Renaissance and to that end bound itself as guarantor and co-principal debtor for the proper execution by Renaissance of all its liabilities under the Medical Schemes Act 1998.” (emphasis supplied) The basis of the exception, as I understand it, is that the plaintiffs failed to make the allegation that the amount claimed in the action is a liability as envisaged in paragraph 6.1 of the particulars of claim (i.e. a liability under the Act). This, according to the defendant is an
Miller%20N.O.%20v%20Prosperity%20Africa%20Holdings%20(Pty)%20Ltd%20(I%202182-2010)%20[2013]%20NAHCMD%20255%20(17%20September%202013).docx