Dingwall v David Hill Enterprise (PTY) LTD (CA27/2016) [2018] SCSC 8332 (29 November 2018)
A betting contract is void ab initio if the event upon which it is based is already certain at the time the bet is placed, regardless of the parties' subjective knowledge. Only bets on games not yet played constitute valid contingent contracts.
- Citation
- [2018] SCSC 8332
- Parties
- Appellant: Terence Dingwall; Respondent: David Hill Enterprise (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Judgment Date
- 29 November 2018
- Case Number
- CA27/2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed in part, upheld in part
- Legal Topics
- Contingent Contracts, Bets and Wagers, Uncertainty in Contract Formation
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Terence Dingwall
Appellant
David Hill Enterprise (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a valid contingent contract existed for bets placed after the outcome was certain
- 2 Whether the Magistrate erred in finding no breach of contract
Ratio Decidendi
A betting contract is void ab initio if the event upon which it is based is already certain at the time the bet is placed, regardless of the parties' subjective knowledge. Only bets on games not yet played constitute valid contingent contracts.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed in part, upheld in part
Orders
- Respondent to pay Appellant Seychelles Rupees Nine Hundred (SR 900) for valid bets won on matches not yet played.
- Respondent to refund Appellant for bets placed on two matches already played.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment