Grobler v Oosthuizen (299/2008) [2009] ZASCA 51; 2009 (5) SA 500 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 508 (SCA) (26 May 2009)

Grobler v Oosthuizen (299/2008) [2009] ZASCA 51; 2009 (5) SA 500 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 508 (SCA) (26 May 2009)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the cession of the insurance policies was a cession in securitatem debiti, not an outright cession. Upon the sale agreement being declared void, the principal debt never existed, and the rights under the policies automatically reverted to Grobler. No re-cession was required. Grobler's claim against Oosthuizen arose when she received payment from Sanlam in September 1997, less than three years before summons was issued. Therefore, the plea of prescription could not succeed. The court rejected the respondent's argument that the claim prescribed in August 1994 and clarified that the nature of the cession and the timing of the claim's accrual were...

Citation
[2009] ZASCA 51
Parties
Appellant: Jacobus Dawid Grobler; Respondent: Cecilia Johanna Oosthuizen
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2009
Case Number
299/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Court Judgment on Special Plea of Prescription
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of the full court set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal with costs.
Judges
Brand, Cloete, Mlambo, Hurt, Leach
Legal Topics
Cession in Securitatem Debiti, Prescription Act, Void Contract, Enrichment Claim, Rei Vindicatio
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Cession in Securitatem Debiti Prescription Act Void Contract Enrichment Claim Rei Vindicatio

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

Parties

Jacobus Dawid Grobler

Appellant

Cecilia Johanna Oosthuizen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Court Judgment on Special Plea of Prescription

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cession of insurance policies was an outright cession or a cession in securitatem debiti.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's claim for the proceeds of the policies was extinguished by prescription.
  3. 3 Whether a re-cession was required for the appellant to reclaim rights under the policies after the sale agreement was declared void.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the cession of the insurance policies was a cession in securitatem debiti, not an outright cession. Upon the sale agreement being declared void, the principal debt never existed, and the rights under the policies automatically reverted to Grobler. No re-cession was required. Grobler's claim against Oosthuizen arose when she received payment from Sanlam in September 1997, less than three years before summons was issued. Therefore, the plea of prescription could not succeed. The court rejected the respondent's argument that the claim prescribed in August 1994 and clarified that the nature of the cession and the timing of the claim's accrual were...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of the full court set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced by an order in the following terms: 'The appeal is dismissed with costs.'