Christiaan de Jongh v Pieter Johannes du Pisanie NO

The matter came before the Supreme Court of Appeal as an appeal against a trial court judgment awarding damages. After the SCA had already delivered its main judgment on 25 May 2004, it was brought to the court’s attention that the judgment contained a numerical (clerical) error regarding the amount awarded for loss of earnings, which in turn led to an incorrect calculation of the total damages and the curator bonis’ costs. This judgment is an additional judgment delivered solely to correct that error and to substitute the affected portions of the original order.

The appeal succeeded with costs. The trial court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order awarding the plaintiff R3 163 116.80 in damages, together with interest at the prescribed rate in terms of the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act 55 of 1975 from 23 December 2000 to date of payment, and with no costs order at that stage.

The case illustrates the Supreme Court of Appeal’s power to correct clerical or arithmetical errors in its own judgments and orders to ensure they accurately reflect the court’s true intention. It confirms that such corrections may be made by way of an additional or supplementary judgment without reopening the merits of the dispute.