Theunissen and Others v Transvaal Lewendehawe Kooperasie Bpk. (209/86) [1987] ZASCA 93; [1988] 1 All SA 289 (A) (22 September 1987)

Theunissen and Others v Transvaal Lewendehawe Kooperasie Bpk. (209/86) [1987] ZASCA 93; [1988] 1 All SA 289 (A) (22 September 1987)

The court held that the bundle of documents relied upon by the respondent, including the suretyship annexure and supporting pages, constitutes a single written contract for purposes of section 6 of the General Amendment Act 50 of 1956. The identity of the creditor is ascertainable from the documents themselves, read as a whole, and may be supplemented by admissible extrinsic evidence. The appellants' argument that the suretyship is invalid due to the absence of the creditor's name in the specific annexure was rejected, as the context and structure of the bundle clearly identify the respondent as the creditor. The court further found that the appellants' signatures at the end of the...

Citation
[1987] ZASCA 93
Parties
Appellant: Daniel Elardus Theunissen; Appellant: Jacobus Human; Appellant: Petrus Johannes Human; Appellant: Michiel Venter; Respondent: Transvaal Lewendehawe Kooperasie Beperk
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 September 1987
Case Number
209/86
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Division; Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Grosskopf, Corbett, Viljoen, Van Heerden, Vivier
Legal Topics
Suretyship, Essentialia of Contract, Exception Procedure, General Amendment Act 1956, Identification of Creditor
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Suretyship Essentialia of Contract Exception Procedure General Amendment Act 1956 Identification of Creditor

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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Elardus Theunissen

Appellant

Jacobus Human

Appellant

Petrus Johannes Human

Appellant

Michiel Venter

Appellant

Transvaal Lewendehawe Kooperasie Beperk

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Division; Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written suretyship contract complies with section 6 of the General Amendment Act 50 of 1956.
  2. 2 Whether the identity of the creditor is ascertainable from the documents forming the suretyship.
  3. 3 Whether the bundle of documents constitutes a single contract for purposes of the statutory requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the bundle of documents relied upon by the respondent, including the suretyship annexure and supporting pages, constitutes a single written contract for purposes of section 6 of the General Amendment Act 50 of 1956. The identity of the creditor is ascertainable from the documents themselves, read as a whole, and may be supplemented by admissible extrinsic evidence. The appellants' argument that the suretyship is invalid due to the absence of the creditor's name in the specific annexure was rejected, as the context and structure of the bundle clearly identify the respondent as the creditor. The court further found that the appellants' signatures at the end of the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.