Quatro Security Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v De Marionette Centre Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (018984/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1272 (27 November 2024)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement should be rectified or have tacit terms read into it, affecting the applicants' right to claim payment.
2. 2 Whether the application was prematurely instituted before a cause of action was completed.
3. 3 Whether the respondents have established a defence based on rectification or tacit terms.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents failed to establish any factual basis for rectification or the existence of tacit terms in the settlement agreement. The agreement contained a non-variation clause, making any oral amendments or conditions unenforceable unless reduced to writing and signed by both parties. The respondents did not provide evidence of a common intention to attach conditions to the final lump sum payment, nor did they allege any drafting mistake common to both parties. The alleged disputes raised by the respondents were not genuine and did not warrant referral to oral evidence or trial. The respondents breached the unconditional settlement agreement by failing to pay the...

Court Disposition

Judgment granted in favour of the applicants; respondents ordered to pay the capital amount, interest, and costs.

Orders

• Respondents, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay the applicants the capital amount of R7,406,703.26.
• Respondents are ordered to pay interest on the aforementioned amount calculated at mora from 1 March 2024 until final payment.