Insurance informer: Prescription and joinder applications update

​​​​​​​​The Webber Wentzel insurance team provides clients with regular updates on new developments in insurance law in South Africa. This update unpacks a recent medical malpractice case.

In a recent medical malpractice case, Ishmael [2022]1, the plaintiff incorrectly instituted action against a property entity and later sought to join the doctors and the practice.

The High Court had to decide on two salient issues: (i) Does the institution of a joinder application interrupt prescription? (ii) Does the granting of the joinder order interrupt prescription?

To answer these questions in the affirmative, the following conditions set out in section 15 of the Prescription Act, 1969, must be met: (i) there must be service of a process; (ii) on the debtor; and (iii) whereby the creditor claims payment of the debt.

Regarding the first issue, the High Court had to consider two conflicting judgments on the point. It agreed with the SCA's decision in Peter Taylor [2014]2, ​ and not the decision in Huyser [2017] 3. The Court found that the effect of a joinder application was to include defendants who were potentially liable under the claim but did not move the substantive process toward the enforcement of a claim for payment of a debt.

Regarding the second the High Court agreed with the decision in Nativa [2020] 4, which applied Peter Taylor. The High Court held that the order with the amended summons and particulars of claim had to be served on the defendants within the prescription period.

In this case, the order for joinder was granted on 5 November 2018. The date of prescription was 4 December 2018; however, the plaintiff only served the amended combined summons and particulars of claim, on 25 January 2019.

The High Court upheld the defendant's special plea of prescription as the amended summons and particulars of claim were not served within the prescription period.

1​ Mdlalose Mduduzi Ishmael and Dr Brendan Lyne Medical Practice & two others [unreported] [1 February 2022] [High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg].

2Peter Taylor & Associates v Bell Estates (Pty) Ltd & Another (Pty) Ltd 2014 (2) SA 312 (SCA).

3Huyser v Quicksure (Pty) Ltd & Another 2017 (4) SA 546 (GP).

4Nativa Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd v Keymax Investments 125 (Pty) Ltd & others 2020 (1) SA 235 (GP).​

Also, for those of you who enjoy a bit of knowledge testing, we set out below a quick quiz "The Webber Wentzel Insurance Cipher", to try and test your insurance law knowledge in practical ways.​


These materials are provided for general information purposes only and do not constitute legal or other professional advice. While every effort is made to update the information regularly and to offer the most current, correct and accurate information, we accept no liability or responsibility whatsoever if any information is, for whatever reason, incorrect, inaccurate or dated. We accept no responsibility for any loss or damage, whether direct, indirect or consequential, which may arise from access to or reliance on the information contained herein.

© Copyright Webber Wentzel. All Rights reserved.

Webber Wentzel > News > Insurance informer: Prescription and joinder applications update
Johannesburg +27 (0) 11 530 5000
Cape Town +27 (0) 21 431 7000
Validating email against database, please wait...
Validating email: please wait...
Email verified: Please click the confirmation link sent to your mailbox, also check junk/spam folder. If you no longer have access to this email address or haven't received the verification email then email
Email verified: You are being redirected to manage your subscription
Email could not be verified: Please wait while you are redirected to the Subscription Form
Unanticipated error: Saving your CRM information Subscription Form