Jurgens and Another v Volschenk (4067/18) [2019] ZAECPEHC 41 (27 June 2019)

Jurgens and Another v Volschenk (4067/18) [2019] ZAECPEHC 41 (27 June 2019)

The respondent, as conveyancer, owed the applicants a duty of care to safeguard the proceeds of the property sale. Despite previous dealings involving the Standard Bank account, the respondent failed to verify the sudden change to an Absa Bank account provided within a short period. The purported statement from Absa Bank lacked identifying details and contained suspicious transactions. A reasonable attorney would have taken steps to confirm the legitimacy of the new account details, especially given the circumstances. The respondent's failure to do so constituted negligence in the execution of her mandate, directly causing the applicants' loss. The amount claimed was not disputed, and the...

Citation
[2019] ZAECPEHC 41
Parties
Applicant: Ben Adrian Jurgens; Applicant: Wendy Jurgens; Respondent: Lynette Volschenk
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 June 2019
Case Number
4067/18
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / First Instance
Outcome
Application granted. The respondent is declared liable for payment of the claimed amount, interest from the date of judgment, and costs.
Judges
B R Tokota
Legal Topics
Professional Negligence, Conveyancing, Duty of Care, Mandate Contract, Damages, Trust Account Liability
Civil Procedure Land and Property Delict Professional Negligence Conveyancing Duty of Care Mandate Contract Damages +1 more

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 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ben Adrian Jurgens

Applicant

Wendy Jurgens

Applicant

Lynette Volschenk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent, as conveyancer, was negligent in paying the proceeds of the property sale to a fraudulent account.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent owed a duty of care to the applicants in the execution of her mandate.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to damages for the loss suffered due to the respondent's conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent, as conveyancer, owed the applicants a duty of care to safeguard the proceeds of the property sale. Despite previous dealings involving the Standard Bank account, the respondent failed to verify the sudden change to an Absa Bank account provided within a short period. The purported statement from Absa Bank lacked identifying details and contained suspicious transactions. A reasonable attorney would have taken steps to confirm the legitimacy of the new account details, especially given the circumstances. The respondent's failure to do so constituted negligence in the execution of her mandate, directly causing the applicants' loss. The amount claimed was not disputed, and the...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The respondent is declared liable for payment of the claimed amount, interest from the date of judgment, and costs.

Orders

  • The respondent is declared liable to the applicants for the payment of R967 510.53 and is ordered to pay the said amount.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay interest on the amount at 10.25% from the date of this judgment to date of payment.