Combined Business Solutions CC v Courier & Freight Group (Pty) Ltd (325/09) [2010] ZASCA 93; [2011] 1 All SA 10 (SCA) (19 July 2010)

Combined Business Solutions CC v Courier & Freight Group (Pty) Ltd (325/09) [2010] ZASCA 93; [2011] 1 All SA 10 (SCA) (19 July 2010)

Assuming, without deciding, that an oral agreement was concluded and breached, the appellant failed to prove that it suffered damages as a consequence. The factual enquiry established that, even if the printer had been supplied and the in-house system installed, the appellant would not have been able to perform the contract with Elster Kent due to the respondent's suspension of its account for non-payment. The suspension was justified under the written agreement, and the appellant's payment into a trust account did not constitute payment or tender. The claim for damages was not supported by evidence of actual loss resulting from the breach, and the appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Citation
[2010] ZASCA 93
Parties
Appellant: Combined Distribution Solutions CC; Respondent: Courier & Freight Group (Pty) Ltd t/a XPS
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 July 2010
Case Number
325/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court; Liability Phase
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Nugent, Heher, Mlambo, Malan, Majiedt
Legal Topics
Oral Contract, Damages for Breach, Credit Facilities, Burden of Proof
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Oral Contract Damages for Breach Credit Facilities Burden of Proof

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Combined Distribution Solutions CC

Appellant

Courier & Freight Group (Pty) Ltd t/a XPS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court; Liability Phase

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral agreement to supply a printer for an in-house system was concluded between the parties.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent breached the oral agreement by failing to supply the printer.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant sustained damages as a consequence of the alleged breach.

Ratio Decidendi

Assuming, without deciding, that an oral agreement was concluded and breached, the appellant failed to prove that it suffered damages as a consequence. The factual enquiry established that, even if the printer had been supplied and the in-house system installed, the appellant would not have been able to perform the contract with Elster Kent due to the respondent's suspension of its account for non-payment. The suspension was justified under the written agreement, and the appellant's payment into a trust account did not constitute payment or tender. The claim for damages was not supported by evidence of actual loss resulting from the breach, and the appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.