Nghidinwa v Shiindi (3965 of 2011) [2012] NAHC 320 (27 November 2012)

# Nghidinwa v Shiindi (3965 of 2011) [2012] NAHC 320 (27 November 2012) [ __](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27) [ __](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27) [ __](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27) [ __](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27) [ __](mailto:?subject=Take a look at this document from NamibLII: Nghidinwa v Shiindi \(3965 of 2011\) \[2012\] …&body=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27) [ Download RTF (622.7 KB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27/source) Toggle dropdown * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27/source.pdf) Report a problem __ * Share * [ Download RTF (622.7 KB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27/source) * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27/source.pdf) * * * * * Report a problem __ ##### Nghidinwa v Shiindi (3965 of 2011) [2012] NAHC 320 (27 November 2012) Copy citation * __Document detail * __Related documents Citation Nghidinwa v Shiindi (3965 of 2011) [2012] NAHC 320 (27 November 2012) Copy Media Neutral Citation [2012] NAHC 320 Copy Court [High Court](/judgments/NAHC/) Case number 3965 of 2011 Judges [Parker AJ](/judgments/all/?judges=Parker%20AJ) Judgment date 27 November 2012 Language English Other documents [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/320/eng@2012-11-27/attachment/nghidinwa-v-shiindi-2012-nahc-320-27-november-2012.pdf) (47.9 KB) * * * Skip to document content **R NOT REPORTABLE EPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA** **HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK** **JUDGMENT** Case no: I 3965/2011 In the matter between: #### **BENJAMIN NDEVAFA NGHIDINWA PLAINTIFF** and **THOMAS SHIINDI DEFENDANT** **Neutral citation:**_Nghidinwa v Shiindi_(I 3965/2011) [[2012] NAHCMD 85](/akn/na/judgment/nahcmd/2012/85) (27 November 2012) **Coram:** PARKER AJ **Heard** : **27 November 2012** **Delivered** : **27 November 2012** **Flynote:** Contract – For sale of goods – Plaintiff alleges defendant’s breach of oral contract resulting in plaintiff’s suffering damages in the amount of N$101 000. **Flynote:** Practice – Trial – Plaintiff not appearing in person or by counsel – Court applying rule 40(3) of the rules of court. **Summary:** Contract – for sale of goods – Breach – Plaintiff alleging defendant’s breach of oral contract for sale of goods – Claim for amount paid to and received by defendant – Defendant claiming no contract between him and plaintiff was concluded. **Summary:** Trial – Rule 40(3) of the rules of court – Application of – Court satisfied that plaintiff was served with all relevant process and documents, including set down trial date – Court applying rule 40(3) – Counsel for defendant led evidence and satisfied the court that final judgment be granted in the defendant’s favour – Court having being so satisfied dismissed plaintiff’s claim with costs. **ORDER** The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed with costs. **JUDGMENT** PARKER AJ: [1] The plaintiff’s claim is for damages suffered in the amount of N$101 000 for breach of oral contract of sale of goods, to wit, bottles of whisky. In his plea and the summary of his evidence, the defendant denies he entered into any oral contract to supply the bottles of whisky to the plaintiff. [2] In the course of events the plaintiff’s legal representatives filed a notice of withdrawal as the plaintiff’s legal representatives of record. I am satisfied that subsequent to the withdrawal, all necessary court papers, including the set down date, were served by registered post on the plaintiff at his last known postal address. [3] At the commencement of trial the plaintiff was called and did not appear in person or by counsel. Thereafter, as is the practice of the court, his name was called many times by the court orderly through the corridors of the court, but there was no response. That being the case, Ms Sikongo, counsel for the defendant, requested the court to deal with the matter in terms of rule 40(3) of the rules of court. She chose to lead evidence with the view to satisfying the court that final judgment should be granted in the defendant’s favour. [4] In this regard, counsel led evidence along the lines set out in the defendant’s brief summary of evidence filed with the court in terms of rule 37(11)(c)(iv) of the rules of court. From the evidence I am satisfied that the defendant has established that no contract for the sale of goods, to wit, bottles of whisky – oral or written – was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant. That being the case the plaintiff’s claim must fail. Whereupon, I make the following order: The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed with costs. \---------------------------- C Parker Acting Judge APPEARANCES PLAINTIFF: No appearance DEFENDANT: N Sikongo Of Nambahu & Uanivi Attorneys, Windhoek #### __Related documents ▲ To the top >