Nippon Import and Export CC v Paladin Properties (Pty) Ltd (12123/07) [2010] ZAKZDHC 13 (29 March 2010)

Nippon Import and Export CC v Paladin Properties (Pty) Ltd (12123/07) [2010] ZAKZDHC 13 (29 March 2010)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving that the defendant breached its obligation to afford undisturbed use and occupation of the leased premises. The evidence showed that any occupation by third parties occurred with the plaintiff's consent and that no complaint or demand to remedy was made to the defendant. The plaintiff's version regarding an arrangement to revise the lease commencement date was rejected as inconsistent with contemporaneous correspondence and affidavits. The special damages claimed by the plaintiff were not shown to be within the contemplation of the parties at the time of contracting, nor was there evidence that the defendant was...

Citation
[2010] ZAKZDHC 13
Parties
Plaintiff: Nippon Import and Export CC; Defendant: Paladin Properties (Pty) Ltd
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2010
Case Number
12123/07
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment After Trial on Merits and Counterclaim
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs. Judgment for the defendant on the counterclaim for outstanding rental and damages for holding over.
Judges
Wallis
Legal Topics
Lease Agreement, Damages for Breach, Holding Over, Special Damages, Burden of Proof, Counterclaim
Land and Property Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Lease Agreement Damages for Breach Holding Over Special Damages Burden of Proof +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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nippon Import and Export CC

Plaintiff

Paladin Properties (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment After Trial on Merits and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached its obligation to afford the plaintiff undisturbed use and occupation of the leased premises from 1 May 2004 to 30 November 2004.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for alleged loss of business due to lack of occupation.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is entitled to recover outstanding rental and damages for holding over after cancellation of the lease.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving that the defendant breached its obligation to afford undisturbed use and occupation of the leased premises. The evidence showed that any occupation by third parties occurred with the plaintiff's consent and that no complaint or demand to remedy was made to the defendant. The plaintiff's version regarding an arrangement to revise the lease commencement date was rejected as inconsistent with contemporaneous correspondence and affidavits. The special damages claimed by the plaintiff were not shown to be within the contemplation of the parties at the time of contracting, nor was there evidence that the defendant was...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs. Judgment for the defendant on the counterclaim for outstanding rental and damages for holding over.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment for the defendant against the plaintiff in the amount of R6 885 474.91.