Skip to main content

Article 40/2025

Is it a requirement that each page of an affidavit must be initialled?

Is it a requirement that every page of every annexure to an affidavit must be initialled?

_____________________________________

The LC, in Ellsworth John O’Connor v LexisNexis (Pty) Ltd (2024) 35 SALLR 124 (LC), had the following to say in respect of the above questions:

  • it pointed out that in casu, while the founding affidavit had been properly commissioned on the last page, every other page had not been initialled by either the applicant or the commissioner
  • the LC was, however, satisfied that there was no defect in the founding affidavit because, on the authority of Minister of Safety and Security and Others v Mohamed and Another (2) [2010] 4 All SA 538 (WCC), at [26], initialling every page is not a requirement for the validity of an affidavit
  • in the LC’s viewpoint, initialling every page of an affidavit certainly represents best practice, because it gives the court confidence that the words used in the affidavit are really those of the deponent – however, initialling every page of the annexures also appeared to be unnecessary, as the other party would always be free to dispute the authenticity of those documents, whether they were initialled or not
August 17, 2026

We think that everyone understands that an employer is vicariously liable for the wrong committed (an act or omission) by its employee during the course/scope/sphere of employment/engagement in any activity reasonably incidental to it.

But, what is the extent of an employer’s vicarious liability where the employee commits a wrong on his or her own volition?

August 10, 2026

What is the content of traditional consensus to indicate that an agreement exists between an employer and an employee?

If, on the traditional theory of consensus, a party fails to prove an agreement upon which it relies, with reference to Sonap Petroleum SA (Pty) Ltd v Pappadogianis 1992 (3) SA 234 (A), on what basis can a finding be made that quasi-mutual assent exists, founded on the approach that a party is precluded from denying the existence of an agreement based on their own conduct and the circumstances?

What does the three-fold enquiry entail to determine the presence of quasi-mutual assent?

In determining whether an agreement has been reached in the absence of traditional consensus, but on the basis of quasi-mutual assent, what is the extent of the duty on the party wishing to rely on such an agreement to, on the basis of reasonableness, enquire as to the contradictions that exist in the position of the other party so contained in correspondence?

August 3, 2026

Where do delictual claims fit into dispute resolution options applicable to employment disputes?