Steyn v LSA Motors Ltd. (207/1992) [1993] ZASCA 163; 1994 (1) SA 49 (AD); [1994] 1 All SA 483 (A) (30 September 1993)

Steyn v LSA Motors Ltd. (207/1992) [1993] ZASCA 163; 1994 (1) SA 49 (AD); [1994] 1 All SA 483 (A) (30 September 1993)

The court held that there was no consensus between the parties, as the respondent never intended to make an offer to the appellant or to amateur players generally. The appellant's belief that the board constituted an offer open to him was unreasonable in light of the rules governing amateur status, the context of the competition, and the announcements made. The reasonable person in the appellant's position would not have believed the respondent intended the prize to be available to amateurs. The board was not an unqualified offer but an advertisement of a prize limited to professionals. Accordingly, no contract arose and the appellant's claim failed.

Citation
[1993] ZASCA 163
Parties
Appellant: Archibald Douw Steyn; Respondent: LSA Motors Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 1993
Case Number
207/1992
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Cape Provincial Division; Trial Court Dismissed Action; Appeal Heard and Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Botha, Hefer, Vivier, Eksteen, Krieger
Legal Topics
Contractual Offer and Acceptance, Objective Intention, Advertisement as Offer, Dissensus, Reasonable Person Test
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Contractual Offer and Acceptance Objective Intention Advertisement as Offer Dissensus Reasonable Person Test

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Archibald Douw Steyn

Appellant

LSA Motors Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Cape Provincial Division; Trial Court Dismissed Action; Appeal Heard and Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the display of the motor car and board at the 17th hole constituted a contractual offer open to all competitors, including amateurs.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant, as an amateur golfer, could accept the alleged offer and claim the prize despite rules limiting amateur status.
  3. 3 Whether a reasonable person in the appellant's position would have believed the respondent intended the offer to be open to amateurs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no consensus between the parties, as the respondent never intended to make an offer to the appellant or to amateur players generally. The appellant's belief that the board constituted an offer open to him was unreasonable in light of the rules governing amateur status, the context of the competition, and the announcements made. The reasonable person in the appellant's position would not have believed the respondent intended the prize to be available to amateurs. The board was not an unqualified offer but an advertisement of a prize limited to professionals. Accordingly, no contract arose and the appellant's claim failed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.