Kavita Kooverjee | Attorney | Senior Professional Assistant | SchoemanLaw Inc | mail me |
An exception may be raised when a summons or a pleading has an inherent defect. The main object of raising an exception is to shorten the legal proceedings because it would be unfair or prejudicial to one party if the matter were to continue.
Rule 23 of the Uniform Rules of Court allows a party to file an exception in response to a pleading within a specified time frame.
Rule 18(4) of the Uniform Rules of Court states that
“every pleading shall contain a clear and concise statement of the material facts upon which the pleader relies for his claim, defence or answer to any pleading as the case may be, with sufficient particularity to enable the opposite party to reply thereto.”
Grounds for an exception
The grounds for an exception to pleadings in general (i.e. summons, particulars of claim or plea for example) are:
- does not disclose a cause of action or defence, or;
- is vague and embarrassing.
Vague and embarrassing
Pleading may be deemed vague and embarrassing in the following instances:
- if it is confusing by being capable of having more than one meaning, or;
- the meaning cannot be reasonably ascertained; or
- it has a determinable meaning, but is so vague that the reader does not know what the other party is basing their case on (factually), or lastly;
- the averments in the pleadings are contradictory and are not pleaded in the alternative.
In conclusion
It is critical that all documents/pleadings filed during the litigation process be clear and concise.
Not only to aid the efficiencies surrounding the court processes, but also, to ensure that litigants have clarity on the position taken by the other side. For legal practitioners, it is crucial to observe this in serving their clients.