Smit v Carniasaad en Andere (145/96) [1998] ZASCA 58; 1998 (4) SA 877 (SCA); (1 September 1998)

Smit v Carniasaad en Andere (145/96) [1998] ZASCA 58; 1998 (4) SA 877 (SCA); (1 September 1998)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the cession by Twee Rivier Boerdery BK to Die Magaliesbergse Graankoperasie Beperk did not entitle the latter to the proceeds of maize seed harvested and delivered by Smit. The cession only covered proceeds from crops produced and delivered by the BK itself, and the condition for the cession to operate was not fulfilled because the BK did not harvest or deliver the maize seed. Smit, as lawful occupier and cultivator under valid agreements, was entitled to the proceeds from the maize seed he harvested and delivered to Carniasaad. The respondent's argument that Smit was aware of the cession was unsupported by admissible evidence and was rejected. The...

Citation
[1998] ZASCA 58
Parties
Appellant: Smit; Respondent: Carniasaad; Respondent: Die Magaliesbergse Graankoperasie Beperk; Respondent: Twee Rivier Boerdery BK; Respondent: Boland Bank
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 September 1998
Case Number
145/96
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Court a Quo
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The appellant is entitled to the proceeds of the maize seed delivered to the first respondent. The second respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the appellant, including reserved costs, but only for one advocate.
Judges
Streicher, Smalberger, Grosskopf, Nienaber, Schutz
Legal Topics
Cession of Claims, Ownership of Produce, Lease of Land, Production Agreement
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Cession of Claims Ownership of Produce Lease of Land Production Agreement

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Smit

Appellant

Carniasaad

Respondent

Die Magaliesbergse Graankoperasie Beperk

Respondent

Twee Rivier Boerdery BK

Respondent

Boland Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Court a Quo

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the cession by Twee Rivier Boerdery BK to Die Magaliesbergse Graankoperasie Beperk entitled the latter to the proceeds of the maize seed harvested and delivered by Smit.
  2. 2 Whether Smit, as lessee and cultivator, was entitled to the proceeds of the maize seed delivered to Carniasaad.
  3. 3 Whether the cession covered future rights to proceeds from crops produced by someone other than the cedent.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the cession by Twee Rivier Boerdery BK to Die Magaliesbergse Graankoperasie Beperk did not entitle the latter to the proceeds of maize seed harvested and delivered by Smit. The cession only covered proceeds from crops produced and delivered by the BK itself, and the condition for the cession to operate was not fulfilled because the BK did not harvest or deliver the maize seed. Smit, as lawful occupier and cultivator under valid agreements, was entitled to the proceeds from the maize seed he harvested and delivered to Carniasaad. The respondent's argument that Smit was aware of the cession was unsupported by admissible evidence and was rejected. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The appellant is entitled to the proceeds of the maize seed delivered to the first respondent. The second respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the appellant, including reserved costs, but only for one advocate.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds.
  • The second respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the appellant.