Loureiro and Others v Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd (CCT 40/13) [2014] ZACC 4; 2014 (5) BCLR 511 (CC); 2014 (3) SA 394 (CC) (20 March 2014)

Loureiro and Others v Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd (CCT 40/13) [2014] ZACC 4; 2014 (5) BCLR 511 (CC); 2014 (3) SA 394 (CC) (20 March 2014)

The Constitutional Court held that the oral contract between Mr Loureiro and Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd was amended by an express prohibition against opening the pedestrian gate without prior authorisation, and this term imposed strict liability. The respondent's employee breached this term by allowing access to imposters, regardless of negligence. In delict, the Court found the conduct wrongful, as public policy and constitutional rights require security companies to prevent unauthorised access and protect clients. The employee's actions were negligent, as a reasonable security guard would have foreseen the risk of imposters and taken steps to verify identity before granting...

Citation
[2014] ZACC 4
Parties
Applicant: Licinio Loureiro; Applicant: Venessa Loureiro; Applicant: Luca-Filipe Loureiro; Applicant: Jean-Enrique Loureiro; Respondent: Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 March 2014
Case Number
CCT 40/13
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of Appeal, Following High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Respondent declared liable in contract and delict for damages to be proved.
Judges
Moseneke, Skweyiya, Cameron, Dambuza, Froneman, Jafta, Madlanga, Nkabinde, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo
Legal Topics
Security Services Liability, Breach of Contract, Vicarious Liability, Wrongfulness, Negligence, Strict Liability
Commercial and Corporate Delict Civil Procedure Security Services Liability Breach of Contract Vicarious Liability Wrongfulness Negligence +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Licinio Loureiro

Applicant

Venessa Loureiro

Applicant

Luca-Filipe Loureiro

Applicant

Jean-Enrique Loureiro

Applicant

Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Supreme Court of Appeal, Following High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should leave to appeal be granted.
  2. 2 Is Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd liable for breach of contract?
  3. 3 Is Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd liable in delict for the Loureiro family's loss?

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that the oral contract between Mr Loureiro and Imvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd was amended by an express prohibition against opening the pedestrian gate without prior authorisation, and this term imposed strict liability. The respondent's employee breached this term by allowing access to imposters, regardless of negligence. In delict, the Court found the conduct wrongful, as public policy and constitutional rights require security companies to prevent unauthorised access and protect clients. The employee's actions were negligent, as a reasonable security guard would have foreseen the risk of imposters and taken steps to verify identity before granting...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Respondent declared liable in contract and delict for damages to be proved.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is upheld.