Kgopana v Matlala (1081/2018) [2019] ZASCA 174 (2 December 2019)

Kgopana v Matlala (1081/2018) [2019] ZASCA 174 (2 December 2019)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the WhatsApp message did not constitute an offer animo contrahendi. In both its context and content, the message was hypothetical and did not convey a genuine intention to contract. The appellant consistently denied having won the lottery and sent the message in response to the respondent's assertion, further indicating a lack of intent. The respondent did not immediately act on the message or claim payment, reinforcing the absence of consensus. The court found no basis for applying the doctrine of quasi-mutual assent, as the message would not have led a reasonable person to believe a binding offer was made. Accordingly, there was no enforceable...

Citation
[2019] ZASCA 174
Parties
Appellant: Ntsieni Morris Kgopana; Respondent: Mohlaki Rosina Matlala
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 December 2019
Case Number
1081/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Limpopo Division of the High Court, Polokwane
Outcome
Appeal upheld; respondent's claim dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Petse, Leach, Wallis, Van der Merwe, Mocumie
Legal Topics
Contract Formation, Animus Contrahendi, Quasi Mutual Assent, Lotteries Act, Maintenance Claim
Commercial and Corporate Contract Formation Animus Contrahendi Quasi Mutual Assent Lotteries Act Maintenance Claim

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ntsieni Morris Kgopana

Appellant

Mohlaki Rosina Matlala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Limpopo Division of the High Court, Polokwane

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the WhatsApp message sent by the appellant constituted an offer animo contrahendi capable of acceptance and giving rise to an enforceable contract.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of quasi-mutual assent applies in the circumstances of this case.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was entitled to claim R1 million for the benefit of the minor child based on the alleged agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the WhatsApp message did not constitute an offer animo contrahendi. In both its context and content, the message was hypothetical and did not convey a genuine intention to contract. The appellant consistently denied having won the lottery and sent the message in response to the respondent's assertion, further indicating a lack of intent. The respondent did not immediately act on the message or claim payment, reinforcing the absence of consensus. The court found no basis for applying the doctrine of quasi-mutual assent, as the message would not have led a reasonable person to believe a binding offer was made. Accordingly, there was no enforceable...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; respondent's claim dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with: 'The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed. There is no order as to costs.'