South African Tourism v Pasis (Pty) Ltd (SCA102/06) [2006] ZASCA 122; [2006] SCA 150(RSA) (29 November 2006)

South African Tourism v Pasis (Pty) Ltd (SCA102/06) [2006] ZASCA 122; [2006] SCA 150(RSA) (29 November 2006)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent's claim was not prescribed, as the obligation to market and promote the product range endured until 31 January 2001. The pleadings did not allege that the obligation was required to be performed before 27 January 2001. Therefore, it could not be found that the appellant breached its obligation more than three years before the summons was served. The trial court's conclusion that the special plea of prescription should be dismissed was correct, and the appeal was refused with costs.

Citation
[2006] SCA 150(RSA)
Parties
Appellant: South African Tourism; Respondent: Pasis (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 2006
Case Number
102/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Special Plea Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Streicher, Brand, Theron
Legal Topics
Prescription, Breach of Contract, Special Plea, Contractual Obligations
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Prescription Breach of Contract Special Plea Contractual Obligations

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Tourism

Appellant

Pasis (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Special Plea Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's claim was prescribed under the Prescription Act before service of summons.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant breached its contractual obligations more than three years prior to summons.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent's claim was not prescribed, as the obligation to market and promote the product range endured until 31 January 2001. The pleadings did not allege that the obligation was required to be performed before 27 January 2001. Therefore, it could not be found that the appellant breached its obligation more than three years before the summons was served. The trial court's conclusion that the special plea of prescription should be dismissed was correct, and the appeal was refused with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is refused.
  • The appellant is ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.