Bruwer N.O and Others v Trustees of the time being of the Phillip Fourie Family Trust (918/2020) [2022] ZAWCHC 8; 2022 (6) SA 214 (WCC) (28 January 2022)

Bruwer N.O and Others v Trustees of the time being of the Phillip Fourie Family Trust (918/2020) [2022] ZAWCHC 8; 2022 (6) SA 214 (WCC) (28 January 2022)

The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for restitution and damages only became due upon cancellation of the oral agreement, which occurred on 11 June 2019. Prescription therefore commenced from the date of cancellation, not from the date of the oral agreement or the payments made. The defendant failed to discharge the onus to prove that the unjustified enrichment claim had prescribed, as the debt only became due when it was clear the condition or modus would not be fulfilled, which was upon cancellation. The Trinity Asset Management case relied upon by the defendant was distinguishable, as it concerned a loan payable on demand and did not alter the law regarding restitutionary claims....

Citation
[2022] ZAWCHC 8
Parties
Plaintiff: Hendrik Bruwer N.O; Plaintiff: Marlisa Bruwer N.O.; Plaintiff: Jaco van Heerden N.O.; Plaintiff: Francois Slabbert N.O.; Defendant: Trustees of the time being of the Phillip Fourie Family Trust
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 January 2022
Case Number
918/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Special Plea of Prescription Argued and Determined
Outcome
Defendant's special plea of prescription dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mangcu-Lockwood
Legal Topics
Prescription Act, Oral Contract, Repudiation, Restitution, Unjustified Enrichment, Damages for Breach
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Prescription Act Oral Contract Repudiation Restitution Unjustified Enrichment Damages for Breach

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

Parties

Hendrik Bruwer N.O

Plaintiff

Marlisa Bruwer N.O.

Plaintiff

Jaco van Heerden N.O.

Plaintiff

Francois Slabbert N.O.

Plaintiff

Trustees of the time being of the Phillip Fourie Family Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Special Plea of Prescription Argued and Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' claims for restitution, damages for breach of contract, and unjustified enrichment have prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 When did the debt become due for purposes of prescription in the context of cancellation following repudiation of an oral agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant discharged the onus to prove prescription in respect of the unjustified enrichment claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for restitution and damages only became due upon cancellation of the oral agreement, which occurred on 11 June 2019. Prescription therefore commenced from the date of cancellation, not from the date of the oral agreement or the payments made. The defendant failed to discharge the onus to prove that the unjustified enrichment claim had prescribed, as the debt only became due when it was clear the condition or modus would not be fulfilled, which was upon cancellation. The Trinity Asset Management case relied upon by the defendant was distinguishable, as it concerned a loan payable on demand and did not alter the law regarding restitutionary claims....

Court Disposition

Defendant's special plea of prescription dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The defendant’s special plea of prescription is dismissed.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.