Hohne v Super Store Mining (Pty) Ltd (831/2016) [2016] ZASCA 186; [2017] 1 All SA 681 (SCA); 2017 (3) SA 45 (SCA) (30 November 2016)

Hohne v Super Store Mining (Pty) Ltd (831/2016) [2016] ZASCA 186; [2017] 1 All SA 681 (SCA); 2017 (3) SA 45 (SCA) (30 November 2016)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's confessions and acknowledgements of debt were admissible and enforceable in the civil proceedings. The court found that the evidence was obtained without legally recognized duress, as the appellant was given a choice and no unlawful threats or extortion occurred. The so-called 'dirty dozen' threat did not amount to duress under South African law, as it did not extort anything to which the respondent was not entitled and was not contra bonos mores. The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving operative duress, having chosen not to testify and provide evidence to support his allegations. The evidence was relevant, supported by...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 186
Parties
Appellant: Dale Lonsdale Hohne; Respondent: Super Stone Mining (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 November 2016
Case Number
831/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Northern Cape Division of the High Court, Kimberley
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Shongwe, Leach, Petse, Willis, Nicholls
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Duress, Acknowledgement of Debt, Theft, Quantum of Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Admissibility of Evidence Duress Acknowledgement of Debt Theft Quantum of Damages

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 5 Authorities cited 30 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dale Lonsdale Hohne

Appellant

Super Stone Mining (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Northern Cape Division of the High Court, Kimberley

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's confessions and acknowledgements of debt were admissible in the civil trial.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence was obtained under legally recognized duress rendering it unenforceable.
  3. 3 Whether the quantum of damages was properly established and enforceable against the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's confessions and acknowledgements of debt were admissible and enforceable in the civil proceedings. The court found that the evidence was obtained without legally recognized duress, as the appellant was given a choice and no unlawful threats or extortion occurred. The so-called 'dirty dozen' threat did not amount to duress under South African law, as it did not extort anything to which the respondent was not entitled and was not contra bonos mores. The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving operative duress, having chosen not to testify and provide evidence to support his allegations. The evidence was relevant, supported by...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • The order of the Northern Cape Division of the High Court, Kimberley is confirmed.