Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Du Plessis; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Steyn; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Du Plessis; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v MacKenzie (208/92) [1993] ZASCA 191 (30 November 1993)

Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Du Plessis; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Steyn; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v Du Plessis; Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk v MacKenzie (208/92) [1993] ZASCA 191 (30 November 1993)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the respondents failed to discharge the burden of proving the absence of justa causa for the cheques issued to the appellant. The evidence indicated that each respondent issued the cheque seriously and deliberately, intending to be contractually bound in connection with the purchase of cattle, even if the underlying transactions were orchestrated by Breedt. The respondents' explanations for issuing the cheques were found to be inherently improbable and inconsistent with the business practices described by the appellant. The court held that the appellant was entitled to provisional judgment against each respondent, as the respondents did not provide...

Citation
[1993] ZASCA 191
Parties
Appellant: Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk; Respondent: L du Plessis; Respondent: C Steyn; Respondent: A du Plessis; Respondent: JJT MacKenzie
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 November 1993
Case Number
208/92
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Provisional Judgment; Consolidated Hearing
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Provisional judgment granted against all four respondents with costs.
Judges
Joubert, Hefer, Van den Heever, Howie, Van Coller
Legal Topics
Negotiable Instruments, Justa Causa, Provisional Judgment, Burden of Proof, Accommodation Party, Cheque Litigation
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Negotiable Instruments Justa Causa Provisional Judgment Burden of Proof Accommodation Party Cheque Litigation

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louw & Collins Afslaers (Edms) Bpk

Appellant

L du Plessis

Respondent

C Steyn

Respondent

A du Plessis

Respondent

JJT MacKenzie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Refusal of Provisional Judgment; Consolidated Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents discharged the burden of proving the absence of justa causa for the cheques issued to the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to provisional judgment against each respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the underlying transactions for which the cheques were issued were fictitious or fraudulent, and if so, whether this affected liability on the cheques.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the respondents failed to discharge the burden of proving the absence of justa causa for the cheques issued to the appellant. The evidence indicated that each respondent issued the cheque seriously and deliberately, intending to be contractually bound in connection with the purchase of cattle, even if the underlying transactions were orchestrated by Breedt. The respondents' explanations for issuing the cheques were found to be inherently improbable and inconsistent with the business practices described by the appellant. The court held that the appellant was entitled to provisional judgment against each respondent, as the respondents did not provide...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Provisional judgment granted against all four respondents with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with provisional judgment in all four matters with costs as follows: