Avante Fishing Enterprises v Rafel Ondernemings CC (4108/05) [2008] ZAECHC 62 (29 May 2008)

Avante Fishing Enterprises v Rafel Ondernemings CC (4108/05) [2008] ZAECHC 62 (29 May 2008)

The court held that the plaintiff's claim for damages had become prescribed. The breach of contract occurred in November 1998 when the defendant failed to sell squid to the plaintiff and refused to retransfer the fishing permits. The plaintiff was aware of its loss and threatened to claim damages in its 1999 letter of demand. The subsequent departmental approval did not create a new cause of action or debt; it merely perfected the right to specific performance. The method of quantifying damages remained consistent from year to year, and no new debt arose with the passage of time. The authorities cited establish that prescription runs from the date of breach, regardless of when damages are...

Citation
[2008] ZAECHC 62
Parties
Plaintiff: Avante Fishing Enterprises; Defendant: Rafel Ondernemings CC
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 2008
Case Number
4108/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Special Plea of Prescription; Stated Case Under Rule 33(4)
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs; defendant's special plea of prescription upheld.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Prescription Act, Breach of Contract, Damages Quantification, Specific Performance, Fishing Rights Transfer
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Prescription Act Breach of Contract Damages Quantification Specific Performance Fishing Rights Transfer

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 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avante Fishing Enterprises

Plaintiff

Rafel Ondernemings CC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Special Plea of Prescription; Stated Case Under Rule 33(4)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim for damages based on breach of contract had become prescribed.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant may revisit or contest findings from previous judgments in the context of the damages action if the special plea fails.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the plaintiff's claim for damages had become prescribed. The breach of contract occurred in November 1998 when the defendant failed to sell squid to the plaintiff and refused to retransfer the fishing permits. The plaintiff was aware of its loss and threatened to claim damages in its 1999 letter of demand. The subsequent departmental approval did not create a new cause of action or debt; it merely perfected the right to specific performance. The method of quantifying damages remained consistent from year to year, and no new debt arose with the passage of time. The authorities cited establish that prescription runs from the date of breach, regardless of when damages are...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs; defendant's special plea of prescription upheld.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's entire claim is dismissed with costs.
  • The defendant's special plea of prescription is upheld.