Steenkamp NO and Others v C.A du Toit Central (Edms) Bpk (CA&R 109/11) [2013] ZANCHC 4 (11 February 2013)

Steenkamp NO and Others v C.A du Toit Central (Edms) Bpk (CA&R 109/11) [2013] ZANCHC 4 (11 February 2013)

The court found that the parties had reached consensus at the time of signing the sale agreement that the property was sold with its entire contents as at the date of viewing and signature. The attempt by the appellants to unilaterally vary the agreement by introducing a list of items after the fact was rejected. The respondent's claim for rectification was supported by the objective facts and the conduct of the parties. The appellants breached the agreement by removing items from the property, entitling the respondent to rectification of clause 14 and general damages. However, the award of special damages was not properly considered by the magistrate and was referred back for...

Citation
[2013] ZANCHC 4
Parties
Appellant: Benita Steenkamp N.O; Appellant: Lukas Marthinus Steenkamp N.O; Appellant: Rachel van der Merwe N.O; Appellant: Gertruda Magdalena Grundlingh N.O; Respondent: C.A. du Toit Central (Edms) Beperk
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 February 2013
Case Number
CA&R 109/11
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From District Magistrate's Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in respect of rectification and general damages; appeal upheld in respect of special damages and costs order.
Judges
Tlaletsi, Mamosebo
Legal Topics
Rectification of Contract, Sale of Immovable Property, Damages for Breach, Interpretation of Contract, Mitigation of Damages
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Rectification of Contract Sale of Immovable Property Damages for Breach Interpretation of Contract Mitigation 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benita Steenkamp N.O

Appellant

Lukas Marthinus Steenkamp N.O

Appellant

Rachel van der Merwe N.O

Appellant

Gertruda Magdalena Grundlingh N.O

Appellant

C.A. du Toit Central (Edms) Beperk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From District Magistrate's Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 14 of the sale agreement should be rectified to reflect the true intention of the parties.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants breached the sale agreement by removing items from the property.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to general and special damages for breach of contract.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the parties had reached consensus at the time of signing the sale agreement that the property was sold with its entire contents as at the date of viewing and signature. The attempt by the appellants to unilaterally vary the agreement by introducing a list of items after the fact was rejected. The respondent's claim for rectification was supported by the objective facts and the conduct of the parties. The appellants breached the agreement by removing items from the property, entitling the respondent to rectification of clause 14 and general damages. However, the award of special damages was not properly considered by the magistrate and was referred back for...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in respect of rectification and general damages; appeal upheld in respect of special damages and costs order.

Orders

  • The appeal against rectification of clause 14 is dismissed. Clause 14 is rectified to reflect the respondent's version.
  • The appeal against the award of general damages is dismissed.