J.H.V v Centlec (SOC) Ltd and Others (2205/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 4 (23 January 2024)

J.H.V v Centlec (SOC) Ltd and Others (2205/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 4 (23 January 2024)

The court found that clause 6.7.1 of the memorandum of understanding dated 27 August 2020, although not entered into with Centlec as a party, constituted an express acknowledgement of liability by the applicant for the Centlec account as per the clearance certificate issued on 10 December 2020. Section 14(1) of the Prescription Act does not require the acknowledgement to be made to the creditor, only that it be made by the debtor. The court relied on Lieberman v Santam Ltd to confirm that such an acknowledgement creates a new enforceable obligation and interrupts prescription. Consequently, the debt had not prescribed, and the applicant remained liable for the amount specified in the...

Citation
[2024] ZAFSHC 4
Parties
Applicant: J.H.V; Respondent: Centlec (SOC) Ltd; Respondent: Mangaung Metro Municipality; Respondent: Lourens Hermanus Pienaar N.O.; Respondent: H.T. V
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Case Number
2205/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; counter-claim upheld.
Judges
Mthimunye
Legal Topics
Prescription Act, Acknowledgement of Debt, Contractual Liability, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Prescription Act Acknowledgement of Debt Contractual Liability Costs Award

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J.H.V

Applicant

Centlec (SOC) Ltd

Respondent

Mangaung Metro Municipality

Respondent

Lourens Hermanus Pienaar N.O.

Respondent

H.T. V

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's debt to Centlec under account number 500[...] was extinguished by prescription as per section 10(1) of the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether clause 6.7.1 of the memorandum of understanding dated 27 August 2020 constitutes an acknowledgement of debt interrupting prescription.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is contractually liable to pay the outstanding Centlec account as per the clearance certificate issued on 10 December 2020.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that clause 6.7.1 of the memorandum of understanding dated 27 August 2020, although not entered into with Centlec as a party, constituted an express acknowledgement of liability by the applicant for the Centlec account as per the clearance certificate issued on 10 December 2020. Section 14(1) of the Prescription Act does not require the acknowledgement to be made to the creditor, only that it be made by the debtor. The court relied on Lieberman v Santam Ltd to confirm that such an acknowledgement creates a new enforceable obligation and interrupts prescription. Consequently, the debt had not prescribed, and the applicant remained liable for the amount specified in the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; counter-claim upheld.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The first respondent's counter-claim for clearance figures in the amount of R2 616 960.35, plus interest at the prescribed rate of 11.25% per annum, is upheld.