Orkin v Goldleaf Investment (Pty) Ltd (22321/2018) [2023] ZAGPJHC 356 (21 April 2023)

Orkin v Goldleaf Investment (Pty) Ltd (22321/2018) [2023] ZAGPJHC 356 (21 April 2023)

The court found that the defendant was contractually obliged, including by tacit term, to provide a fully serviced site with municipal and electrical infrastructure. The defendant failed to ensure the timely supply of electricity, which delayed the plaintiff's occupation and completion of her home. The defendant's attempt to shift responsibility to Eskom was rejected, as it did not take reasonable steps to facilitate the connection. Damages flowing from the breach were limited to those proven, namely rental, project manager costs, gardener, and legal costs, while other claimed damages were not sufficiently substantiated. The counterclaim was dismissed due to lack of locus standi, as the...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 356
Parties
Plaintiff: Nadine Orkin; Defendant: Goldleaf Investments (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 April 2023
Case Number
22321/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for damages partially succeeds; defendant's counterclaim is dismissed.
Judges
MIA
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Breach of Contract, Damages Assessment, Locus Standi, Cession of Rights, Municipal Services Supply
Land and Property Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Implied Terms Breach of Contract Damages Assessment Locus Standi Cession of Rights +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nadine Orkin

Plaintiff

Goldleaf Investments (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was required to supply the necessary infrastructure for a fully serviced site regarding municipal and electrical services.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached the sale agreement by failing to provide or ensure the supply of electricity, causing delay in completion of building works.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff proved causation and quantum of damages flowing from the breach.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant was contractually obliged, including by tacit term, to provide a fully serviced site with municipal and electrical infrastructure. The defendant failed to ensure the timely supply of electricity, which delayed the plaintiff's occupation and completion of her home. The defendant's attempt to shift responsibility to Eskom was rejected, as it did not take reasonable steps to facilitate the connection. Damages flowing from the breach were limited to those proven, namely rental, project manager costs, gardener, and legal costs, while other claimed damages were not sufficiently substantiated. The counterclaim was dismissed due to lack of locus standi, as the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for damages partially succeeds; defendant's counterclaim is dismissed.

Orders

  • The defendant is to pay the plaintiff the sum of R486,550.36.
  • Interest on the aforesaid sum at the prescribed rate from 1 March 2018 to date of final payment.