Stead v Conradie en Andere (655/92) [1994] ZASCA 147; 1995 (2) SA 111 (AD); [1995] 1 All SA 472 (A) (29 September 1994)

Stead v Conradie en Andere (655/92) [1994] ZASCA 147; 1995 (2) SA 111 (AD); [1995] 1 All SA 472 (A) (29 September 1994)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's obligation to release the respondents from their suretyships arose from the written contract of 29 October 1990, which was valid and binding. The appellant's argument that the respondents failed to make a proper tender of performance regarding the transfer of shares was rejected because this issue was never pleaded nor made a point of dispute at trial. The respondents had always indicated their willingness to take all necessary steps to effect transfer, and there was no evidence that they could not do so. The court found that the determination of the purchase price for the property was objectively ascertainable and did not render the...

Citation
[1994] ZASCA 147
Parties
Appellant: Heyns Willmore Stead; Respondent: Jacobus Louis Conradie; Respondent: Abraham Carel Jacobus Wiid; Respondent: Die Abrie Wiid Trust
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 1994
Case Number
655/92
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Joubert, Van Heerden, Vivier, F H Grosskopf, Van den Heever
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Contract Rectification, Company Share Transfer, Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Specific Performance Contract Rectification Company Share Transfer Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Heyns Willmore Stead

Appellant

Jacobus Louis Conradie

Respondent

Abraham Carel Jacobus Wiid

Respondent

Die Abrie Wiid Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was obliged to release the respondents from all suretyships given to creditors of Lowveld Breweries (Pty) Limited under the written contract of 29 October 1990.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents made a proper tender of performance regarding the transfer of shares to the appellant.
  3. 3 Whether the contract was void due to vagueness in the determination of the purchase price for the property.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's obligation to release the respondents from their suretyships arose from the written contract of 29 October 1990, which was valid and binding. The appellant's argument that the respondents failed to make a proper tender of performance regarding the transfer of shares was rejected because this issue was never pleaded nor made a point of dispute at trial. The respondents had always indicated their willingness to take all necessary steps to effect transfer, and there was no evidence that they could not do so. The court found that the determination of the purchase price for the property was objectively ascertainable and did not render the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two advocates.