Daddy Tee Builders CC v Smith (CA 128/2020) [2021] ZAECGHC 37 (13 April 2021)

Daddy Tee Builders CC v Smith (CA 128/2020) [2021] ZAECGHC 37 (13 April 2021)

The appellate court found that the probabilities favoured the applicant's version that an oral contract was concluded on 26 June 2014 for a larger extension at an increased price. The respondent's denial of knowledge of the relevant plans and the size of the extension was found to be improbable, especially given the evidence that the completed extension matched the specifications of the revised plan. The trial magistrate erred in his assessment of the evidence and credibility, failing to adequately weigh the probabilities and the respondent's evasive responses. The applicant discharged the onus of proof on a balance of probabilities, and the appeal was upheld. The matter was referred back...

Citation
[2021] ZAECGHC 37
Parties
Applicant: Daddy Tee Builders CC; Respondent: Maria Sophia Smith
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 April 2021
Case Number
CA 128/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs; order of the trial court set aside; oral contract for larger extension declared proven; quantum of claims referred back to trial court.
Judges
Rugunanan, Nglangulela
Legal Topics
Oral Contract, Building Contract, Quantum of Damages, Counterclaim, Credibility Assessment
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Oral Contract Building Contract Quantum of Damages Counterclaim Credibility Assessment

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

Parties

Daddy Tee Builders CC

Applicant

Maria Sophia Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties concluded an oral contract on 26 June 2014 for the construction of a larger extension at an increased price.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is liable to pay the increased contract sum under the oral agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the trial magistrate erred in his assessment of the probabilities and credibility of the parties' versions.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court found that the probabilities favoured the applicant's version that an oral contract was concluded on 26 June 2014 for a larger extension at an increased price. The respondent's denial of knowledge of the relevant plans and the size of the extension was found to be improbable, especially given the evidence that the completed extension matched the specifications of the revised plan. The trial magistrate erred in his assessment of the evidence and credibility, failing to adequately weigh the probabilities and the respondent's evasive responses. The applicant discharged the onus of proof on a balance of probabilities, and the appeal was upheld. The matter was referred back...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs; order of the trial court set aside; oral contract for larger extension declared proven; quantum of claims referred back to trial court.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted for the late filing of the appellant's notice of appeal.
  • The costs in the application for condonation shall be borne by the appellant.