Adendorff Auctioneers (Pty) Ltd. v Pretorius (300/88) [1989] ZASCA 174 (5 December 1989)

Adendorff Auctioneers (Pty) Ltd. v Pretorius (300/88) [1989] ZASCA 174 (5 December 1989)

The court held that a binding oral contract of sale was concluded at the auction between Wobbe and Mostert when the vehicles were knocked down to Mostert. The conditions of sale, which were read out and provided for credit, governed the transaction. Delivery was effected when Mostert, with Beytell's consent, left the vehicles at the auction premises. Ownership passed to Mostert upon delivery in terms of the general rule for credit sales. The subsequent written agreement between the plaintiff and Mostert did not transfer ownership to the plaintiff, as it purported to be a sale from the plaintiff to Mostert, not vice versa, and there was no delivery from Mostert to the plaintiff. The...

Citation
[1989] ZASCA 174
Parties
Appellant: Adendorff Auctioneers (Pty) Limited; Respondent: J. C. Pretorius
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 December 1989
Case Number
300/88
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orange Free State Provincial Division; Trial Judgment Absolved Plaintiff From the Instance; Appeal Heard and Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Vivier, Joubert, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Ownership Transfer, Auction Sales, Credit Sales, Passing of Dominium, Estoppel
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Ownership Transfer Auction Sales Credit Sales Passing of Dominium Estoppel

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adendorff Auctioneers (Pty) Limited

Appellant

J. C. Pretorius

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orange Free State Provincial Division; Trial Judgment Absolved Plaintiff From the Instance; Appeal Heard and Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff established ownership of the vehicles in question.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was estopped from asserting ownership of the vehicles.
  3. 3 Whether ownership passed to Mostert at the auction sale and subsequently to the plaintiff via written agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a binding oral contract of sale was concluded at the auction between Wobbe and Mostert when the vehicles were knocked down to Mostert. The conditions of sale, which were read out and provided for credit, governed the transaction. Delivery was effected when Mostert, with Beytell's consent, left the vehicles at the auction premises. Ownership passed to Mostert upon delivery in terms of the general rule for credit sales. The subsequent written agreement between the plaintiff and Mostert did not transfer ownership to the plaintiff, as it purported to be a sale from the plaintiff to Mostert, not vice versa, and there was no delivery from Mostert to the plaintiff. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.