Lai Thom and Another v Cowley and Another (117/2010) [2012] ZAECPEHC 86 (20 November 2012)

Lai Thom and Another v Cowley and Another (117/2010) [2012] ZAECPEHC 86 (20 November 2012)

The court found that no contract of sale was concluded between the parties because the offer to purchase had lapsed before acceptance and was not validly revived. The respondents' conduct, including correspondence and payment of the deposit, did not amount to a waiver of their rights regarding the invalid acceptance of the offer. The letter relied upon by the applicants and the signing of transfer documents did not constitute a waiver by the respondents. The requirements for a valid waiver were not met, and the law stipulates that agreements for the sale of land must be in writing. The court was not persuaded that another court would find for the applicants on any of the issues raised.

Citation
[2012] ZAECPEHC 86
Parties
Applicant: Edward Lai Thom; Applicant: Pam Golding Properties; Respondent: Nigel Cowley; Respondent: Margaret Cowley
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 November 2012
Case Number
117/2010
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
N Dambuza
Legal Topics
Contract of Sale, Waiver of Rights, Late Acceptance of Offer, Formalities in Sale of Land
Land and Property Civil Procedure Contract of Sale Waiver of Rights Late Acceptance of Offer Formalities in Sale of Land

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Lai Thom

Applicant

Pam Golding Properties

Applicant

Nigel Cowley

Respondent

Margaret Cowley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the expiry date in the sale agreement was for the benefit of the respondents and could be waived.
  2. 2 Whether a valid contract of sale was concluded despite late acceptance of the offer.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents waived their rights regarding the invalid acceptance of the offer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that no contract of sale was concluded between the parties because the offer to purchase had lapsed before acceptance and was not validly revived. The respondents' conduct, including correspondence and payment of the deposit, did not amount to a waiver of their rights regarding the invalid acceptance of the offer. The letter relied upon by the applicants and the signing of transfer documents did not constitute a waiver by the respondents. The requirements for a valid waiver were not met, and the law stipulates that agreements for the sale of land must be in writing. The court was not persuaded that another court would find for the applicants on any of the issues raised.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay such costs jointly and severally; the one paying, the other to be absolved.