Santam Insurance Ltd v Ferguson (941/85) [1985] ZASCA 78; [1985] 2 All SA 591 (A) (12 September 1985)

Santam Insurance Ltd v Ferguson (941/85) [1985] ZASCA 78; [1985] 2 All SA 591 (A) (12 September 1985)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the deceased operated his panelbeating business without the required licence, in contravention of Ordinance 15 of 1953. The business premises were unsuitable for licensing due to health and fire risks, and the local authority would not have approved the operation. The income earned was unlawful and not legally enforceable. The respondent's claim for loss of support was based entirely on this unlawful income. The court found that public policy and statutory provisions preclude dependants from claiming damages based on illegal earnings. The trial court erred in awarding damages for loss of support, as the calculation was necessarily based on...

Citation
[1985] ZASCA 78
Parties
Appellant: Santam Insurance Ltd; Respondent: Margaret Jane Ferguson
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 September 1985
Case Number
941/85
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Cape Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs. The order of the trial court is amended to grant absolution from the instance with costs regarding the claim for R20,000 loss of support.
Judges
Rabie, Jansen, Joubert, Cillié, Grosskopf
Legal Topics
Loss of Support, Illegality of Income, Statutory Licensing, Quantum of Damages
Civil Procedure Delict Loss of Support Illegality of Income Statutory Licensing Quantum of Damages

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Santam Insurance Ltd

Appellant

Margaret Jane Ferguson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Cape Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a dependant can claim loss of support based on income earned from an unlawful, unlicensed business.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's damages for loss of maintenance are enforceable when the deceased's income was not legally obtained.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in awarding damages based on unlawful earnings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the deceased operated his panelbeating business without the required licence, in contravention of Ordinance 15 of 1953. The business premises were unsuitable for licensing due to health and fire risks, and the local authority would not have approved the operation. The income earned was unlawful and not legally enforceable. The respondent's claim for loss of support was based entirely on this unlawful income. The court found that public policy and statutory provisions preclude dependants from claiming damages based on illegal earnings. The trial court erred in awarding damages for loss of support, as the calculation was necessarily based on...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs. The order of the trial court is amended to grant absolution from the instance with costs regarding the claim for R20,000 loss of support.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is amended to grant absolution from the instance with costs in respect of the claim for R20,000 for loss of support.