Knopp No and Another v Standard Bank of SA Ltd (AR119/2008) [2009] ZAKZHC 12 (25 February 2009)

Knopp No and Another v Standard Bank of SA Ltd (AR119/2008) [2009] ZAKZHC 12 (25 February 2009)

The court held that the appellants' defences regarding the invalidity of the installment sale agreement due to the vehicle's status as illegally imported or stolen were not supported by the express terms of the agreement. The agreement contained no express provision obliging the plaintiff to pass ownership upon payment of the purchase price, nor did it render the contract unenforceable under the circumstances alleged. The attempt to introduce new defences on appeal was rejected, as it is settled law that new points cannot be raised for the first time on appeal if they were not canvassed in the lower court and would be unfair to the opposing party. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Citation
[2009] ZAKZHC 12
Parties
Appellant: Kurt Robert Knoop N.O.; Appellant: Erich Schravesande; Respondent: Standard Bank of S.A. Limited
Court
High Courts - Kwazulu Natal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 February 2009
Case Number
AR119/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Costs awarded against the appellants, jointly and severally, on the attorney and client scale.
Judges
Kruger, K Pillay
Legal Topics
Installment Sale Agreement, Suretyship, Illegality of Contract, Warranty Against Eviction, Remittal on Appeal
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Installment Sale Agreement Suretyship Illegality of Contract Warranty Against Eviction Remittal on Appeal

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

Parties

Kurt Robert Knoop N.O.

Appellant

Erich Schravesande

Appellant

Standard Bank of S.A. Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the installment sale agreement is invalid and unenforceable due to the vehicle being illegally imported or stolen.
  2. 2 Whether the accessory claim against the second defendant as surety is unenforceable if the principal agreement is invalid.
  3. 3 Whether new defences can be raised for the first time on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellants' defences regarding the invalidity of the installment sale agreement due to the vehicle's status as illegally imported or stolen were not supported by the express terms of the agreement. The agreement contained no express provision obliging the plaintiff to pass ownership upon payment of the purchase price, nor did it render the contract unenforceable under the circumstances alleged. The attempt to introduce new defences on appeal was rejected, as it is settled law that new points cannot be raised for the first time on appeal if they were not canvassed in the lower court and would be unfair to the opposing party. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Costs awarded against the appellants, jointly and severally, on the attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellants are ordered to pay the costs of appeal jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved, on the scale as between attorney and client.