Low NO and Others v Consortium Consolidated Corporation (Pty) Ltd. (384/96) [1998] ZASCA 92; 1999 (1) SA 445 (SCA); (29 September 1998)

Low NO and Others v Consortium Consolidated Corporation (Pty) Ltd. (384/96) [1998] ZASCA 92; 1999 (1) SA 445 (SCA); (29 September 1998)

The court held that, even applying the cautious approach required when a defence is raised against a deceased estate, the evidence established that the respondent delivered the exchange coins to the deceased. The deceased's character—his secretiveness, intelligence, and careful business dealings—supported the respondent's account. Documentation showed the deceased was aware the coins had arrived and were no longer held by the respondent, yet he continued to transact with the respondent, which corroborated delivery. The inability of the executors to locate the coins was explained by the deceased's eccentricity and secretive habits. Accordingly, the appellants failed to prove non-delivery,...

Citation
[1998] ZASCA 92
Parties
Appellant: Donald John Low, N.O.; Appellant: Elsie Edith Low, N.O.; Appellant: Mara Odette Warren, N.O.; Respondent: Consortium Consolidated Corporation (Pty) Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 1998
Case Number
384/96
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Hefer, Vivier, FH Grosskopf, Plewman, Farlam
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Burden of Proof, Contract Cancellation
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Specific Performance Burden of Proof Contract Cancellation

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

Parties

Donald John Low, N.O.

Appellant

Elsie Edith Low, N.O.

Appellant

Mara Odette Warren, N.O.

Appellant

Consortium Consolidated Corporation (Pty) Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent delivered the exchange coins to the deceased as required by the agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants were entitled to cancel the agreement and claim return of the deceased's coins or their value.
  3. 3 Which party bore the onus of proof regarding delivery of the exchange coins.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, even applying the cautious approach required when a defence is raised against a deceased estate, the evidence established that the respondent delivered the exchange coins to the deceased. The deceased's character—his secretiveness, intelligence, and careful business dealings—supported the respondent's account. Documentation showed the deceased was aware the coins had arrived and were no longer held by the respondent, yet he continued to transact with the respondent, which corroborated delivery. The inability of the executors to locate the coins was explained by the deceased's eccentricity and secretive habits. Accordingly, the appellants failed to prove non-delivery,...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.