14 Apr: Grg HCrt: H 51/19: LJ v GHJ: Self Representation

* Graeme Johnstone, Hilary Johnstone, Frode Moe, Lee Moe, Millers Inc, Arno Crous
* 14 Apr: Grg HCrt: H 51/19: LJ v GHJ: Self Representation.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub / EoP ADR: LJ v Graeme Johnstone, LJ v Frode Moe, State v LJ, LJ v State  / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMZA | EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP  Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Psych / EoP v WiP Neg.

Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 23:40:18 +0200
From: Lara Johnson <eop-leg-sub@tygae.org.za>
To: Graeme Johnson <graeme.johnstone@gmail.com>, Hilary Johnstone <hilary.johnstone@gmail.com>, Frode Moe <fro.moe@online.no>, Lee Moe <lee.moe@telkomsa.net>
Cc: “Moe Counsel: Millers Inc: Arno Crous” <arno@millers.co.za>
Subject: Grg HCrt: H 51/19: LJ v GHJ: Self Representation
Message-ID: <af04a75489ebe511126501e52fdf6ec5@tygae.org.za>
X-Sender: eop-leg-sub@tygae.org.za
Attachment: 19-04-14_LJvGHJ_Not2Opp.pdf

.

TO: Graeme Johnson (graeme.johnstone@gmail.com); Hilary Johnstone (hilary.johnstone@gmail.com); Frode Moe (fro.moe@online.no); Lee Moe (lee.moe@telkomsa.net)
CC: Moe Counsel: Millers Inc: Arno Crous (arno@millers.co.za)

Graeme and Hilary / Frode & Talitha:

Grg HCrt: H 51/19: LJ v GHJ: Self Representation.

The Sheriff informed me on the phone on Friday, 12 April 2019, that he had served the documents on all respondents by Friday 05 April 2019, and that I could pick up the documentation confirming service on Monday 15 April 2019. If that 05 April 2019 sheriff service date is accurate.

If you intend representing yourselves, in legal terminology, be Pro Se Respondents:

There are two ways in which a civil court case can be filed. In an application proceeding, the evidence is submitted to the court in under oath written affidavits. In an action proceeding the evidence is submitted before the court under oath verbally court. Our case is filed as an application proceeding: evidence is submitted to court in under oath written affidavits. Application proceedings are cheaper and quicker, and generally used where the issue in dispute is a matter of law not fact, or if a matter of fact, such matter of fact can be reasonably resolved by evidence in the form of under oath written affidavits.

If you intend to oppose the court orders I am requesting the court to grant against you; then you need to file a Notice to Oppose by Friday 26 April 2019. Your Notice of Intention to Oppose should include the address at which you will accept notice and service of all documents in these proceedings. You must provide me with a copy of the Notice to Oppose and file the original with the High Court Registrar: 2nd floor, Room 207. Example of formatting of a Notice to Oppose is attached.

If or when a respondent does not file a notice of intention to oppose, then I can place the matter on the roll for default judgement, without further notice to the particular respondent. Put simply, the Rules of Court allow the Judge to interpret your failure to file your notice of intention to oppose as your consent to judgement of the orders requested.

Within ten days after you have given notice of your intention to oppose the application, you must file your answering affidavit. Your affidavit should reply to every allegation clarifying whether you consent to the allegation, or deny the allegation, and if so why you deny the allegation, and evidence in support of your denial. If you fail to deal with a specific allegation, then the allegation will be deemed to be admitted. Your affidavit can request further information or evidence as to any allegation.

I shall file a Reply Affidavit, within ten days / two weeks of receipt of your Answering Affidavit. Generally at this point the matter is set down for hearing, but if there are still unanswered questions or evidence left out, by either party, such affidavits, including any expert witness affidavits, if necessary; can be filed, to make sure that both parties have submitted all their evidence into the court record.

Then the matter is set down for the court hearing. No further evidence will be submitted once both parties have had a chance to submit affidavits and the matter is set down for hearing. At the hearing our arguments before the judge will be limited to oral argument, basically each sides closing argument interpretation and emphasis of the evidence in the affidavits, and answering any of the Judge’s questions. The Judge may also refer the matter to mediation; to enable the parties to reach settlement out of court, if possible, prior to judgement.

Once you file your notice to Oppose, you may consent that the matter be referred to court annexed mediation as noted in Rule 78: Referral to mediation by litigants [Court Annexed Mediation: Rules] – in our case privately facilitated court annexed mediation, because court annexed mediation has not yet been implemented at George Magistrates Court – at any time, after commencement of litigation [Service by the Sheriff] but prior to judgement [matter placed on the roll for judgement hearing].

A copy of this correspondence is documented at EoP Legal Submissions [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]: LJ v GH Johnstone et al [lj-v-ghj.tygae.org.za].

Respectfully,

Lara Johnson,
Pro Se, EoP Applicant [EoP Oath PDF]

.

Notice to Graeme Johnstone via SMS:

SMS to 082-492 4471 on 15 Apr 2019 at 08:47 + 0200:
“Pls read 14 apr email sent to you, hilary, frode and talitha. Copy at lj-v-ghj-corr.tygae.org.za.”

Redirect / Archive:
lj-v-ghj-corr.tygae.org.za redirects to http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/category/eop-leg-sub/lj-v-ghj/   [archive.is/FjWPM]

.