Cisa Specialita Alimentari S.R.L. v Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd (26828/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 78 (29 January 2024)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2024 >> [2024] ZAGPJHC 78 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Cisa Specialita Alimentari S.R.L. v Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd (26828/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 78 (29 January 2024) Cisa Specialita Alimentari S.R.L. v Africa's Best Foods (Pty) Ltd (26828/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 78 (29 January 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_78.html sino date 29 January 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg) Case no:  26828/2021 In the matter between CISA SPECIALITÁ ALIMENTARI S.R.L.                                               APPLICANT Versus AFRICA'S BEST FOODS (PTY) LTD                                                     RESPONDENT JUDGMENT WRIGHT , J 1.         The respondent in the main application seeks a postponement. 2.         The parties have been at each others’ throats for some time. 3.         The dispute is a commercial one. Each side seeks money from the other. 4.         The parties point fingers at each other, regarding procedure. 5.         The application for a postponement appears to have been brought late. 6.         On the other hand, it appears that the main applicant’s attorney refused to accept service of summons in South Africa in a counterclaim of sorts. This caused the main respondent to have to go the route of edictal citation and service of an intendit in Italy. 7.         In short, the main respondent wants a postponement so that the recent action proceedings, served in Italy, can be consolidated with the present application. 8.         There appear to be deep disputes of fact underlying the greater dispute. Whether or not the present application is to be ultimately consolidated with the pending action is for another court to decide. That consolidation application should be determined in due course. 9.         It would be unwise of me to decide now today’s costs. ORDER 1.         The main application is postponed sine die, costs reserved. 2.         The question of the costs of the postponement application are reserved. _________________________________________ GC Wright Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division, Johannesburg Heard: 29 January 2024 Delivered: 29 January 2024 Appearances: For the applicant:                           Advocate M Nieuwoudt Instructed by:                                  Werth Scroder Inc Attorneys For the respondent:                         Mr. Opperman Instructed by:                                    C & O Inc Attorneys sino noindex make_database footer start