Helesi and Another v Tradepost 62 (Pty) Ltd t/a Africas Auction Authority and Another (1287/09) [2009] ZAECPEHC 54 (5 November 2009)

Helesi and Another v Tradepost 62 (Pty) Ltd t/a Africas Auction Authority and Another (1287/09) [2009] ZAECPEHC 54 (5 November 2009)

The court found that the contract of sale was concluded at the auction for the agreed price of R180,000 for the Toyota Quantum. The mistaken invoice for R18,000 did not constitute a valid variation of the contract, as the agreement required any variation to be in writing and signed by both parties. The applicants' reliance on the mistaken invoice and subsequent registration of the vehicle was disingenuous and did not alter their obligation to pay the full purchase price. The respondents were entitled to withhold delivery of the Quantum until payment of the balance. However, the respondents had no right to withhold the registration documents for the Land Rover, as there was no dispute...

Citation
[2009] ZAECPEHC 54
Parties
Applicant: Simphiwe Thankslord Helesi; Applicant: Bongani Burns Nqini; Respondent: Tradepost 62 (Pty) Limited t/a Africas Auction Authority; Respondent: West Bank Limited
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 November 2009
Case Number
1287/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
The main application for delivery of the Toyota Quantum is dismissed with costs. The respondents are ordered to deliver the registration documents for the Land Rover and pay costs up to the date of tender. The second applicant is ordered to pay the balance of the purchase price for the Quantum and the costs of the...
Judges
Makaula
Legal Topics
Contract of Sale, Variation of Contract, Auction Sale, Locus Standi, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Contract of Sale Variation of Contract Auction Sale Locus Standi Costs Order

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

Parties

Simphiwe Thankslord Helesi

Applicant

Bongani Burns Nqini

Applicant

Tradepost 62 (Pty) Limited t/a Africas Auction Authority

Respondent

West Bank Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to delivery of the Toyota Quantum based on the invoice reflecting R18,000 instead of R180,000.
  2. 2 Whether the issuing of a mistaken invoice constitutes a variation of the contract of sale.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents were entitled to withhold the registration documents for the Land Rover.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the contract of sale was concluded at the auction for the agreed price of R180,000 for the Toyota Quantum. The mistaken invoice for R18,000 did not constitute a valid variation of the contract, as the agreement required any variation to be in writing and signed by both parties. The applicants' reliance on the mistaken invoice and subsequent registration of the vehicle was disingenuous and did not alter their obligation to pay the full purchase price. The respondents were entitled to withhold delivery of the Quantum until payment of the balance. However, the respondents had no right to withhold the registration documents for the Land Rover, as there was no dispute...

Court Disposition

The main application for delivery of the Toyota Quantum is dismissed with costs. The respondents are ordered to deliver the registration documents for the Land Rover and pay costs up to the date of tender. The second applicant is ordered to pay the balance of the purchase price for the Quantum and the costs of the...

Orders

  • The order sought directing the respondents to deliver the Toyota Quantum to the first applicant is dismissed; applicants to pay costs, one paying the other to be absolved.
  • Respondents are ordered to deliver to the second applicant the registration documents for the Land Rover and pay costs thereof up to 10 June 2009, one paying the other to be absolved.