De Jongh v Du Pisanie NO (220/2003) [2004] ZASCA 66 (1 June 2004)

De Jongh v Du Pisanie NO (220/2003) [2004] ZASCA 66 (1 June 2004)

The Supreme Court of Appeal identified a numerical error in its previous judgment, specifically in the calculation of the award for loss of earnings. The error led to an incorrect total damages figure. The court recalculated the award, confirming that the correct amount for loss of earnings was R1 096 225, not R1 906 225 as previously stated. The total damages were recalculated to R3 163 116.80. The court substituted its previous order with a new order reflecting the corrected amount, specifying that interest would run from 14 days after the date of judgment at the prescribed rate. No costs order was made at this stage. The correction ensures that the judgment accurately reflects the...

Citation
[2004] ZASCA 66
Parties
Appellant: Christiaan de Jongh; Respondent: Pieter Johannes du Pisanie NO
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 2004
Case Number
220/2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supplementary Judgment Correcting Calculation Error
Outcome
Appeal succeeds with costs. The previous order is set aside and replaced with a corrected damages award and interest order.
Judges
Marais, Brand, Jones
Legal Topics
Quantification of Damages, Rectification of Judgment, Interest on Awards
Civil Procedure Quantification of Damages Rectification of Judgment Interest on Awards

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

Parties

Christiaan de Jongh

Appellant

Pieter Johannes du Pisanie NO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supplementary Judgment Correcting Calculation Error

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a calculation error in the original judgment regarding the quantification of damages should be corrected.
  2. 2 What is the correct total amount of damages to be awarded to the appellant.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate interest and cost order following the correction.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal identified a numerical error in its previous judgment, specifically in the calculation of the award for loss of earnings. The error led to an incorrect total damages figure. The court recalculated the award, confirming that the correct amount for loss of earnings was R1 096 225, not R1 906 225 as previously stated. The total damages were recalculated to R3 163 116.80. The court substituted its previous order with a new order reflecting the corrected amount, specifying that interest would run from 14 days after the date of judgment at the prescribed rate. No costs order was made at this stage. The correction ensures that the judgment accurately reflects the...

Court Disposition

Appeal succeeds with costs. The previous order is set aside and replaced with a corrected damages award and interest order.

Orders

  • Judgment is granted in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for R3 163 116.80 as damages.
  • Interest on the amount at the rate prescribed by the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act 55 of 1975 from 14 days after the date hereof (23 December 2000) until date of payment.