Mastertreads v Breed (134/97) [1999] ZASCA 1 (18 February 1999)

Mastertreads v Breed (134/97) [1999] ZASCA 1 (18 February 1999)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant knew the lockring on one trailer wheel was defective and unsafe when it was returned to the respondent. The appellant failed to warn the respondent of the danger, and the evidence presented by the respondent and his employee was accepted as credible. The appellant's employee, Snydert, was found to be an unreliable witness, and his version was rejected. The court held that the appellant's negligence in failing to warn the respondent was the sole cause of the respondent's injuries. The alternative argument that the respondent could not succeed based on expert evidence was dismissed, as the expert provided a plausible explanation for the...

Citation
[1999] ZASCA 1
Parties
Appellant: Mastertreads; Respondent: Casper Jan Hendrik Breed
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 February 1999
Case Number
134/97
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
F H Grosskopf, Hefer, Nienaber
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty to Warn, Product Liability
Delict Negligence Duty to Warn Product Liability

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mastertreads

Appellant

Casper Jan Hendrik Breed

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was negligent in returning a defective and unsafe wheel to the respondent without warning.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's failure to warn the respondent of the defect caused the respondent's injuries.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's evidence regarding the lack of warning and the condition of the wheel was credible.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant knew the lockring on one trailer wheel was defective and unsafe when it was returned to the respondent. The appellant failed to warn the respondent of the danger, and the evidence presented by the respondent and his employee was accepted as credible. The appellant's employee, Snydert, was found to be an unreliable witness, and his version was rejected. The court held that the appellant's negligence in failing to warn the respondent was the sole cause of the respondent's injuries. The alternative argument that the respondent could not succeed based on expert evidence was dismissed, as the expert provided a plausible explanation for the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.