Pezzutto v Dreyer and Others (209/90) [1992] ZASCA 46; 1992 (3) SA 379 (AD); [1992] 2 All SA 81 (A) (27 March 1992)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the evidence established the existence of an ad hoc partnership agreement between Pezzutto, De Polo, Dreyer, and Wylie for the exploitation of the Jesus and other mine dumps. The handshake agreement, confirmed by subsequent conduct and documentation, satisfied the essentialia of a partnership: each party contributed something of commercial value, the venture was for joint benefit, and the object was profit. The court rejected the respondents' arguments that the agreement was void for vagueness or merely an agreement to agree. The parties acted on the agreement, and Dreyer's conduct was consistent only with the existence of a partnership. The...
- Citation
- [1992] ZASCA 46
- Parties
- Appellant: Guglielmo Pezzutto; Respondent: Cornelius Johannes Burger Dreyer; Respondent: Brian G Wylie; Respondent: Mineral & Exploration Corporation (Pty) Limited
- Court
- Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 27 March 1992
- Case Number
- 209/90
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Witwatersrand Local Division; Trial Court Granted Absolution From the Instance; Leave to Appeal Granted to Appellant and Cross Appeal Granted to Respondents.
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed with costs; cross-appeal dismissed with costs. The partnership is declared to have ended on 20 January 1988. Provision is made for the appointment of a liquidator if the parties cannot agree on the distribution of net benefits within two months.
- Judges
- Joubert, EM Grosskopf, Smalberger, Van den Heever, Van Coller
- Legal Topics
- Partnership Formation, Ad Hoc Joint Venture, Essentialia of Partnership, Oral Agreement, Dissolution of Partnership
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Guglielmo Pezzutto
Appellant
Cornelius Johannes Burger Dreyer
Respondent
Brian G Wylie
Respondent
Mineral & Exploration Corporation (Pty) Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Witwatersrand Local Division; Trial Court Granted Absolution From the Instance; Leave to Appeal Granted to Appellant and Cross Appeal Granted to Respondents.
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an ad hoc partnership agreement was concluded between Pezzutto, De Polo, Dreyer, and Wylie regarding the exploitation of mine dumps.
- 2 Whether the handshake agreement satisfied the essentialia of a partnership under South African law.
- 3 Whether the agreement was void for vagueness or amounted only to an agreement to agree in future.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the evidence established the existence of an ad hoc partnership agreement between Pezzutto, De Polo, Dreyer, and Wylie for the exploitation of the Jesus and other mine dumps. The handshake agreement, confirmed by subsequent conduct and documentation, satisfied the essentialia of a partnership: each party contributed something of commercial value, the venture was for joint benefit, and the object was profit. The court rejected the respondents' arguments that the agreement was void for vagueness or merely an agreement to agree. The parties acted on the agreement, and Dreyer's conduct was consistent only with the existence of a partnership. The...
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed with costs; cross-appeal dismissed with costs. The partnership is declared to have ended on 20 January 1988. Provision is made for the appointment of a liquidator if the parties cannot agree on the distribution of net benefits within two months.
Orders
- The appeal is allowed, with costs.
- The order of the trial court is substituted with a declaration that the partnership between Pezzutto, De Polo, Dreyer, and Wylie regarding the exploitation of the mine dumps ended on 20 January 1988.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment