BKB Limited v Bezuidenhout (3115/2017) [2019] ZAECGHC 18 (5 March 2019)

BKB Limited v Bezuidenhout (3115/2017) [2019] ZAECGHC 18 (5 March 2019)

The court found that only one oral agreement was concluded between BKB Limited and the defendant, Pieter Bezuidenhout, for the sale and delivery of fertilizer, with payment due only upon demand. The evidence established that BKB Limited was the contracting party at the relevant time. The parties expressly agreed that payment would only be due upon demand, and demand was made on 14 June 2017. Therefore, prescription did not begin to run until demand was made, and the claim had not prescribed. The defendant's special plea of prescription was dismissed. The plaintiff proved its claim for R318 115.06 on a balance of probabilities. Costs were awarded on the high court scale due to the...

Citation
[2019] ZAECGHC 18
Parties
Plaintiff: BKB Limited; Defendant: Pieter Bezuidenhout
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2019
Case Number
3115/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim succeeds; defendant's special plea of prescription dismissed.
Judges
G H Bloem
Legal Topics
Oral Contract, Prescription Act, Payment on Demand, Summary Judgment, Costs Award
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Oral Contract Prescription Act Payment on Demand Summary Judgment Costs Award

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

Parties

BKB Limited

Plaintiff

Pieter Bezuidenhout

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether one or multiple oral agreements were concluded between the parties.
  2. 2 Whether BKB Limited was the contracting party at the time of the agreement and deliveries.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's claim has prescribed under the Prescription Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that only one oral agreement was concluded between BKB Limited and the defendant, Pieter Bezuidenhout, for the sale and delivery of fertilizer, with payment due only upon demand. The evidence established that BKB Limited was the contracting party at the relevant time. The parties expressly agreed that payment would only be due upon demand, and demand was made on 14 June 2017. Therefore, prescription did not begin to run until demand was made, and the claim had not prescribed. The defendant's special plea of prescription was dismissed. The plaintiff proved its claim for R318 115.06 on a balance of probabilities. Costs were awarded on the high court scale due to the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim succeeds; defendant's special plea of prescription dismissed.

Orders

  • The defendant's special plea of prescription is dismissed.
  • The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the sum of R318 115.06.