Replace goods; appointment of damages (2013911265) [2013] ZACGSO 7 (30 October 2013)

Replace goods; appointment of damages (2013911265) [2013] ZACGSO 7 (30 October 2013)

Both the supplier's delivery agents and the complainant's neighbour acted negligently in the delivery and subsequent loss of the goods. The delivery agents failed to follow proper procedures by allowing an unauthorised third party to sign for the goods and not requiring the authorised neighbour to sign the delivery note. The neighbour, acting as the complainant's agent, did not exercise reasonable care by failing to verify the identity and authority of the person claiming the goods. Applying the Apportionment of Damages Act, the adjudicator finds that both parties contributed to the loss and that damages should be apportioned accordingly. The supplier is ordered to replace the goods at...

Citation
[2013] ZACGSO 7
Parties
Applicant: Complainant; Respondent: House and Home
Court
Consumer Goods and Services Ombud
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 October 2013
Case Number
2013911265
Procedural Posture
Consumer Complaint / Adjudication
Outcome
Both parties found negligent; damages apportioned. Supplier to replace goods at its cost, complainant to contribute R500.00, supplier to bear delivery cost.
Judges
Bonita Hughes
Legal Topics
Apportionment of Damages, Negligence, Delivery of Goods, Agency Liability
Civil Procedure Apportionment of Damages Negligence Delivery of Goods Agency Liability

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Complainant

Applicant

House and Home

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consumer Complaint / Adjudication

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the supplier and the complainant's neighbour acted negligently in the delivery and subsequent loss of goods.
  2. 2 Whether damages should be apportioned between the supplier and the complainant based on their respective fault.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate remedy for the complainant given the circumstances of the loss.

Ratio Decidendi

Both the supplier's delivery agents and the complainant's neighbour acted negligently in the delivery and subsequent loss of the goods. The delivery agents failed to follow proper procedures by allowing an unauthorised third party to sign for the goods and not requiring the authorised neighbour to sign the delivery note. The neighbour, acting as the complainant's agent, did not exercise reasonable care by failing to verify the identity and authority of the person claiming the goods. Applying the Apportionment of Damages Act, the adjudicator finds that both parties contributed to the loss and that damages should be apportioned accordingly. The supplier is ordered to replace the goods at...

Court Disposition

Both parties found negligent; damages apportioned. Supplier to replace goods at its cost, complainant to contribute R500.00, supplier to bear delivery cost.

Orders

  • The supplier must replace the stolen goods at its cost.
  • The complainant must pay R500.00 to the supplier to receive the replacement goods.