Plaaslike Boeredienste (Edms) Bpk. v Chemfos Bpk. (90/83) [1985] ZASCA 127; [1985] 2 All SA 155 (A); [1986] 2 All SA 42 (A) (28 November 1985)

Plaaslike Boeredienste (Edms) Bpk. v Chemfos Bpk. (90/83) [1985] ZASCA 127; [1985] 2 All SA 155 (A); [1986] 2 All SA 42 (A) (28 November 1985)

The court found that the option and payments made by Beyers to Moodie, an agent and director of the respondent, constituted a bribe intended to induce Moodie to influence the respondent to enter into the contract of 24 February 1974. The evidence established that the arrangement was secret and not disclosed to the respondent or its holding company. The court held that, in terms of South African law and persuasive English authority, a principal may repudiate a contract procured by bribery of its agent, irrespective of whether actual influence is proven. The contract, the arbitration proceedings, and the referees' award were thus voidable at the instance of the respondent. The respondent...

Citation
[1985] ZASCA 127
Parties
Appellant: Plaaslike Boeredienste (Eiendoms) Beperk; Respondent: Chemfos Beperk
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 1985
Case Number
90/83
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Rabie, Miller, Hoexter, Botha, Van Heerden
Legal Topics
Contract Repudiation, Bribery, Agency Law, Unlawful Conduct, Damages, Arbitration Award Enforcement
Commercial and Corporate Delict Contract Repudiation Bribery Agency Law Unlawful Conduct Damages Arbitration Award Enforcement

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaaslike Boeredienste (Eiendoms) Beperk

Appellant

Chemfos Beperk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract of 24 February 1974 between the parties was procured by bribery and thus voidable by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitration proceedings and the referees' award are of any force and effect given the alleged bribery.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to repudiate the contract and claim damages for professional expenses incurred as a result of the unlawful conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the option and payments made by Beyers to Moodie, an agent and director of the respondent, constituted a bribe intended to induce Moodie to influence the respondent to enter into the contract of 24 February 1974. The evidence established that the arrangement was secret and not disclosed to the respondent or its holding company. The court held that, in terms of South African law and persuasive English authority, a principal may repudiate a contract procured by bribery of its agent, irrespective of whether actual influence is proven. The contract, the arbitration proceedings, and the referees' award were thus voidable at the instance of the respondent. The respondent...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two advocates.
  • The orders of the trial court are confirmed.