AB Ventures Ltd v Siemens Ltd (2011 (4) SA 614 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 58; 294/10 (31 March 2011)

AB Ventures Ltd v Siemens Ltd (2011 (4) SA 614 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 58; 294/10 (31 March 2011)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the exception to AB Ventures' claim was correctly upheld. The court reasoned that Aquilian liability for pure economic loss is not automatically wrongful and requires policy considerations to justify its extension. In this case, AB Ventures was capable of contractually avoiding the loss it suffered by negotiating terms in its contract with Lumwana, such as extensions of time or indemnities for delays caused by other contractors. The absence of contractual privity between AB Ventures and Siemens did not warrant an extension of delictual liability, as the law already provided a means for AB Ventures to avoid the loss. The court distinguished the present...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 58
Parties
Appellant: AB Ventures Limited; Respondent: Siemens Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 March 2011
Case Number
294/10
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Nugent, Cloete, Ponnan, Snyders, Bosielo
Legal Topics
Pure Economic Loss, Aquilian Liability, Negligence, Contractual Exclusion of Liability
Delict Commercial and Corporate Pure Economic Loss Aquilian Liability Negligence Contractual Exclusion of Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB Ventures Limited

Appellant

Siemens Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Siemens' negligent conduct was wrongful and actionable in delict at the instance of AB Ventures.
  2. 2 Whether the law should extend Aquilian liability to allow recovery of pure economic loss in the absence of contractual privity.
  3. 3 Whether AB Ventures was capable of contractually avoiding the loss it suffered.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the exception to AB Ventures' claim was correctly upheld. The court reasoned that Aquilian liability for pure economic loss is not automatically wrongful and requires policy considerations to justify its extension. In this case, AB Ventures was capable of contractually avoiding the loss it suffered by negotiating terms in its contract with Lumwana, such as extensions of time or indemnities for delays caused by other contractors. The absence of contractual privity between AB Ventures and Siemens did not warrant an extension of delictual liability, as the law already provided a means for AB Ventures to avoid the loss. The court distinguished the present...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.