Pieter Westerman Colyn v Tiger Food Industries Limited trading as Meadow Feed Mills Cape

The appellant, a dairy farmer, was sued by the respondent supplier for payment of cattle fodder delivered, in the amount of R397 210.22. After entering an appearance to defend, the respondent applied for summary judgment. The application was properly served on the appellant’s attorneys’ Cape Town office but, due to an internal filing failure, it was not brought to the attention of the attorney handling the matter. No opposing affidavit was filed and summary judgment was granted by default. The appellant applied for rescission, alleging attorney error and asserting a defence that the fodder was defective and caused cattle deaths. The High Court dismissed the rescission application, and the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

This case is a leading authority on the narrow scope of Rule 42(1)(a) rescission and confirms that attorney negligence or internal administrative errors do not render a judgment 'erroneously granted'. It reinforces the principle of finality of judgments and clarifies the distinction between rescission under Rule 42 and rescission under the common law.