Afrimine (Pty) Ltd v Two Rivers Platinum (Pty) Ltd (40197/2016) [2019] ZAGPJHC 439 (10 October 2019)

Afrimine (Pty) Ltd v Two Rivers Platinum (Pty) Ltd (40197/2016) [2019] ZAGPJHC 439 (10 October 2019)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of a tacit contract on the terms alleged. The conduct relied upon by the plaintiff was contradicted by its own evidence, and no unequivocal prior conduct was established to support consensus ad idem. The terms pleaded were either too wide, discretionary, or not supported by facts or circumstances from which they could be inferred. The plaintiff's witness contradicted the pleaded version, and no oral agreement was pleaded or canvassed. As a result, the plaintiff did not establish a contract on a balance of probabilities, and there was no case for the defendant to answer. Absolution from the instance was granted.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 439
Parties
Plaintiff: Afrimine (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Two Rivers Platinum (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 October 2019
Case Number
40197/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Absolution From the Instance
Outcome
Absolution from the instance granted in favour of the defendant.
Judges
Wepener
Legal Topics
Tacit Contract, Pleadings, Absolution From the Instance, Contractual Consensus
Commercial and Corporate Tacit Contract Pleadings Absolution From the Instance Contractual Consensus

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

Parties

Afrimine (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Two Rivers Platinum (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Absolution From the Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a tacit contract existed between the parties on the terms alleged.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff proved unequivocal conduct establishing consensus ad idem.
  3. 3 Whether the pleaded terms could be inferred from the parties' conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of a tacit contract on the terms alleged. The conduct relied upon by the plaintiff was contradicted by its own evidence, and no unequivocal prior conduct was established to support consensus ad idem. The terms pleaded were either too wide, discretionary, or not supported by facts or circumstances from which they could be inferred. The plaintiff's witness contradicted the pleaded version, and no oral agreement was pleaded or canvassed. As a result, the plaintiff did not establish a contract on a balance of probabilities, and there was no case for the defendant to answer. Absolution from the instance was granted.

Court Disposition

Absolution from the instance granted in favour of the defendant.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the costs of the action.