Sims v Jooste and Ors (No.4)

In *Sims v Jooste and Ors (No.4)*, heard before Judge Antoni Lucev, the applicant sought to strike out portions of an affidavit filed by the respondent, alleging the material was scandalous or inadmissible. The applicant also applied for an order for substituted service of an originating application and, at the hearing, sought to extend the time for such substituted service. Further, the applicant sought to re-open and read affidavits previously not read, and to allow the re-opening of the proceedings for that purpose. Finally, the applicant sought indemnity costs.

The court was required to determine whether the material in the respondent's affidavit was scandalous or inadmissible, thereby warranting its striking out. It also had to consider whether to grant an extension of time for the substituted service of the originating application and whether to make the order for substituted service itself. Additionally, the court needed to decide whether to permit the re-opening of the proceedings to read previously unread affidavits and whether indemnity costs were payable.

Judge Lucev considered the meaning of "scandalous" in the context of affidavits, noting that it generally refers to material that is irrelevant, vexatious, and reflects on the character of a party without serving any legitimate purpose. The court applied principles relating to the admissibility of evidence and the court's discretion in managing proceedings, including the granting of extensions of time and orders for substituted service, which require a demonstration of good reason and that the proposed service is likely to bring the proceedings to the notice of the party to be served. The court also considered the circumstances under which it may re-open proceedings and the criteria for awarding indemnity costs, which are typically reserved for cases where a party has acted vexatiously, abusively, or unreasonably.