, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
QUESTION 1: CIVIL PRACTICE
Question 1.1
(a) Will it be advisable to commence with a letter of demand to commence with the legal action
against the hotel and what are the possible benefits for doing so?
Yes, it would be advisable to commence with a letter of demand before proceeding with legal
action against the hotel. A letter of demand serves several purposes:
1. Opening Negotiations: It provides an opportunity for the hotel to settle the matter without the
need for litigation, potentially saving both parties significant time, effort, and legal costs. This can be
a first step towards an amicable resolution before costly legal proceedings are initiated1 .
2. Tactical Advantage: Should the hotel fail to respond or deny liability, this can work in Mrs.
Slipper’s favor, especially if the case goes to court. The hotel’s failure to address the demand may
cast doubt on their position1.
3. Preliminary Evidence: A letter of demand can also serve as a record that the defendant was
properly notified of the claim. This can be important for any subsequent court proceedings1.
A letter of demand is generally an essential first step, not just for legal strategy but also for
procedural purposes under South African law1.
(b) Mrs. Slipper instructs you to proceed with a summons following the failure of the hotel to
respond to the letter of demand. Discuss whether Mrs. Slipper should use a provisional sentence
summons or a combined summons to institute her claim or action.
Mrs. Slipper should use a combined summons to institute her claim against the hotel.
1. Provisional Sentence Summons: This type of summons is used in cases where the plaintiff has a
liquid document (such as a signed acknowledgment of debt or a cheque) to prove the defendant’s
liability for a fixed amount2 . However, Mrs. Slipper's claim appears to be based on a delictual (tort)
action for negligence, which does not involve a liquid document.
2. Combined Summons: This summons is appropriate when the claim is unliquidated, such as in
cases of negligence, where the exact amount of damages may need to be determined by the court3 .
Since the damages from Mrs. Slipper’s fall are not fixed (medical expenses, future care costs, and
pain and suffering), a combined summons would be the correct choice3.
1: (Marnewick 2019: p71)
2: (Marnewick 2019: p126)
3: (Marnewick 2019: p104)
QUESTION 1: CIVIL PRACTICE
Question 1.1
(a) Will it be advisable to commence with a letter of demand to commence with the legal action
against the hotel and what are the possible benefits for doing so?
Yes, it would be advisable to commence with a letter of demand before proceeding with legal
action against the hotel. A letter of demand serves several purposes:
1. Opening Negotiations: It provides an opportunity for the hotel to settle the matter without the
need for litigation, potentially saving both parties significant time, effort, and legal costs. This can be
a first step towards an amicable resolution before costly legal proceedings are initiated1 .
2. Tactical Advantage: Should the hotel fail to respond or deny liability, this can work in Mrs.
Slipper’s favor, especially if the case goes to court. The hotel’s failure to address the demand may
cast doubt on their position1.
3. Preliminary Evidence: A letter of demand can also serve as a record that the defendant was
properly notified of the claim. This can be important for any subsequent court proceedings1.
A letter of demand is generally an essential first step, not just for legal strategy but also for
procedural purposes under South African law1.
(b) Mrs. Slipper instructs you to proceed with a summons following the failure of the hotel to
respond to the letter of demand. Discuss whether Mrs. Slipper should use a provisional sentence
summons or a combined summons to institute her claim or action.
Mrs. Slipper should use a combined summons to institute her claim against the hotel.
1. Provisional Sentence Summons: This type of summons is used in cases where the plaintiff has a
liquid document (such as a signed acknowledgment of debt or a cheque) to prove the defendant’s
liability for a fixed amount2 . However, Mrs. Slipper's claim appears to be based on a delictual (tort)
action for negligence, which does not involve a liquid document.
2. Combined Summons: This summons is appropriate when the claim is unliquidated, such as in
cases of negligence, where the exact amount of damages may need to be determined by the court3 .
Since the damages from Mrs. Slipper’s fall are not fixed (medical expenses, future care costs, and
pain and suffering), a combined summons would be the correct choice3.
1: (Marnewick 2019: p71)
2: (Marnewick 2019: p126)
3: (Marnewick 2019: p104)
