Strike Out Applications in South Africa: What They Are and When They Matter

In litigation, clarity and relevance are everything. When a pleading contains unnecessary, scandalous or prejudicial material, it can derail proceedings, increase costs and obscure the real issues in dispute. This is where strike out applications play a critical role in South African civil litigation.

At Barter McKellar, we regularly advise clients on whether a strike out application is strategically appropriate and when it may do more harm than good.

This article explains what strike out applications are, when they are relevant and how they are used effectively in South Africa.

What Is a Strike Out Application?

A strike out application is a procedural remedy that allows a party to apply to court to remove certain portions of an opposing party’s pleading.

In the High Court, strike out applications are governed by Rule 23(2) of the Uniform Rules of Court. In the Magistrates’ Courts, the equivalent provisions are found in Rule 19(6).

A court may strike out matter that is:

• Scandalous;

• Vexatious;

• Irrelevant;

and that causes prejudice to the party bringing the application.

All four elements matter. A pleading will not be struck out merely because it is irritating or poorly drafted, there must be real procedural or substantive prejudice.

What Does “Scandalous, Vexatious or Irrelevant” Mean?

South African courts interpret these concepts narrowly, to avoid excessive interlocutory litigation.

1. Scandalous Matter

Material that is abusive, defamatory or makes gratuitous allegations not necessary to sustain a cause of action or defence.

Example: Allegations attacking a party’s character or integrity where these are not legally relevant to the dispute.

2. Vexatious Matter

Allegations included to harass, embarrass or burden the opposing party rather than to advance the case.

Example: Repeating allegations already dismissed or including inflammatory assertions with no evidentiary foundation.

3. Irrelevant Matter

Content that does not advance or undermine any pleaded cause of action or defence.

Example: Lengthy background narratives or commercial history that have no legal bearing on the relief sought.

Prejudice: The Critical Requirement

Even if matter is scandalous, vexatious or irrelevant, a strike out application may fail unless the applicant can show prejudice.

Prejudice may include:

• Difficulty in pleading meaningfully in response;

• Increased costs and delays;

• Risk of reputational harm;

• Confusion of the real issues before the court.

Courts consistently warn against strike out applications being used as tactical weapons or delay mechanisms.

When Is a Strike Out Application Appropriate?

At Barter McKellar, we typically recommend considering a strike out application where:

• The pleading contains serious reputational allegations unrelated to the legal issues;

• The opposing party is attempting to litigate collateral disputes through pleadings;

• Irrelevant material makes it impossible to plead properly;

• The pleading is being used to pressure or embarrass, rather than to ventilate genuine disputes.

Strike out applications are particularly relevant in:

• Commercial and shareholder disputes;

• Contractual litigation;

• Regulatory and compliance-related matters;

• Employment and disciplinary disputes; and

• High-stakes financial or reputational cases.

When a Strike Out Application Is Not Advisable

Not every defective pleading justifies a strike out application.

Courts discourage unnecessary interlocutory skirmishes and a failed strike out application may result in:

• Adverse costs orders';

• Delays in resolving the substantive dispute;

• Judicial irritation.

In some cases, the better strategy may be to:

• Address the defects in a plea or replication;

• Request further particulars;

• Raise issues during trial or argument.

Strategic restraint is often as important as procedural aggression.

Strategic Considerations: A Barter McKellar Perspective

Strike out applications should be approached as precision tools, not blunt instruments.

At Barter McKellar, we assess:

• Whether the impugned material truly causes prejudice;

• Whether the application advances the client’s commercial objectives;

• The likelihood of success based on judicial precedent; and

• Cost versus benefit, including timing and momentum in the litigation.

Our focus is always on efficient dispute resolution, not procedural point-scoring.

Conclusion

Strike out applications are an important feature of South African civil procedure, designed to keep litigation focused, fair and efficient. When used correctly, they protect parties from abusive or irrelevant pleadings. When misused, they can inflate costs and delay justice.

If you are faced with a pleading that oversteps the mark or are considering a strike out application, early strategic advice is critical.

Need Advice on Litigation Strategy?

Barter McKellar advises corporates, directors and high-net-worth clients on complex commercial disputes and procedural strategy across South Africa.

Contact us to discuss whether a strike out application is appropriate in your matter or how best to respond if one has been threatened.