Kometsi and Another v Mellet Construction (A58/11) [2012] ZAFSHC 6 (2 February 2012)

Kometsi and Another v Mellet Construction (A58/11) [2012] ZAFSHC 6 (2 February 2012)

The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to prove that all work was performed strictly according to the original contract and specifications. The evidence established that deviations and additions were made at the appellants' request, and the respondent properly quantified and reconciled the costs. The trial court correctly preferred the respondent's version, finding that the appellants were contractually liable for the outstanding balance, including additional work and shortfall due to insufficient bank payment. The appellants' denials were unsupported and contradicted by documentary and oral evidence. The trial magistrate did not commit any misdirection on the facts or...

Citation
[2012] ZAFSHC 6
Parties
Appellant: Tseliso Robin Kometsi; Appellant: Morwesi Aletta Kometsi; Respondent: Mellet Construction
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 February 2012
Case Number
A58/11
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bloemfontein District Court Judgment Delivered on 7 October 2007
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Judgment of the court a quo upheld. Costs awarded against appellants jointly and severally.
Judges
Rampai, Ebrahim
Legal Topics
Building Contract Dispute, Quantification of Claim, Contractual Deviation, Onus of Proof, Interpretation of Contract, Costs Order
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Land and Property Building Contract Dispute Quantification of Claim Contractual Deviation Onus of Proof Interpretation of Contract +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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tseliso Robin Kometsi

Appellant

Morwesi Aletta Kometsi

Appellant

Mellet Construction

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Bloemfontein District Court Judgment Delivered on 7 October 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent proved the quantum of its claim for additional building costs and shortfall.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants deviated from the original building contract by requesting additions.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent performed additional work by mutual agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to prove that all work was performed strictly according to the original contract and specifications. The evidence established that deviations and additions were made at the appellants' request, and the respondent properly quantified and reconciled the costs. The trial court correctly preferred the respondent's version, finding that the appellants were contractually liable for the outstanding balance, including additional work and shortfall due to insufficient bank payment. The appellants' denials were unsupported and contradicted by documentary and oral evidence. The trial magistrate did not commit any misdirection on the facts or...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Judgment of the court a quo upheld. Costs awarded against appellants jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The judgment of the court a quo delivered on 10 October 2007 is upheld.