De Swardt v House of Trucks (Edms) Bpk (143/05) [2006] ZASCA 32; [2006] SCA 33 (RSA) (27 March 2006)

De Swardt v House of Trucks (Edms) Bpk (143/05) [2006] ZASCA 32; [2006] SCA 33 (RSA) (27 March 2006)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that an oral contract for the manufacture of fuel tankers existed between the appellant and the respondent, with a guarantee for a year. The respondent's actions in commencing manufacture and the uncontested evidence of the appellant supported the existence of the contract. The guarantee was not limited to repairs but covered any loss caused by breach, including consequential damages. The court held that ordinary damages, such as loss of profits, flow directly from breach of the guarantee and are recoverable without the need to prove special damages were contemplated. The appeal was upheld, and the appellant was declared entitled to claim any damages...

Citation
[2006] SCA 33 (RSA)
Parties
Appellant: Daleen Alta de Swardt; Respondent: The House of Trucks (Edms) Bpk
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 March 2006
Case Number
143/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Full Court of the Free State High Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs. Declaration of contract and entitlement to damages flowing from breach of guarantee.
Judges
Scott, Conradie, Cloete, Lewis, Van Heerden
Legal Topics
Oral Contract, Guarantee, Consequential Damages, Breach of Contract
Commercial and Corporate Oral Contract Guarantee Consequential Damages Breach of Contract

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daleen Alta de Swardt

Appellant

The House of Trucks (Edms) Bpk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Full Court of the Free State High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an oral contract for the manufacture of fuel tankers existed between the parties.
  2. 2 Whether the contract included a guarantee for a year and entitled the plaintiff to claim consequential damages on breach.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's written quotation excluded liability for consequential loss.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that an oral contract for the manufacture of fuel tankers existed between the appellant and the respondent, with a guarantee for a year. The respondent's actions in commencing manufacture and the uncontested evidence of the appellant supported the existence of the contract. The guarantee was not limited to repairs but covered any loss caused by breach, including consequential damages. The court held that ordinary damages, such as loss of profits, flow directly from breach of the guarantee and are recoverable without the need to prove special damages were contemplated. The appeal was upheld, and the appellant was declared entitled to claim any damages...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs. Declaration of contract and entitlement to damages flowing from breach of guarantee.

Orders

  • It is declared that there was a contract between the parties in terms of which the defendant would manufacture for the plaintiff two sets of fuel tankers, which would be under guarantee for a year.
  • The plaintiff is entitled to claim any damages that flow from the breach of the guarantee.