Van Heerden N.O and Others v Danwet NO.131 (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) (A174/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1015 (29 November 2019)

Van Heerden N.O and Others v Danwet NO.131 (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) (A174/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1015 (29 November 2019)

The court held that the notarial surety bond, when read as a whole and in conjunction with the acknowledgement of debt, does not constitute a standalone surety agreement by the respondent in favour of the appellants. The bond's primary clauses reference an acknowledgement of debt between the Trust and Johan Georg van Heerden, with no mention of the respondent as a party to the debt or as a surety. The secondary clauses must be read in context with the primary clauses, and the evidence presented, including the testimony of Johan Georg van Heerden, was found to be contradictory and unreliable. The registration of the notarial surety bond in the Deeds Office does not cure its deficiencies or...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 1015
Parties
Appellant: PS Van Heerden N.O.; Appellant: J Van Heerden N.O.; Appellant: FC Fouche N.O.; Appellant: KP Van Heerden N.O.; Respondent: Danwet NO.131 (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 2019
Case Number
A174/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of the Court a Quo
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
C J Van der Westhuizen, SP Mothle, Kumalo
Legal Topics
Suretyship, Interpretation of Contracts, Notarial Bond, Acknowledgement of Debt
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Suretyship Interpretation of Contracts Notarial Bond Acknowledgement of Debt

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PS Van Heerden N.O.

Appellant

J Van Heerden N.O.

Appellant

FC Fouche N.O.

Appellant

KP Van Heerden N.O.

Appellant

Danwet NO.131 (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of the Court a Quo

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notarial surety bond constitutes a standalone surety agreement granted by the respondent in favour of the appellants.
  2. 2 Whether the registration of an incomplete notarial surety bond in the Deeds Office renders it valid as a surety agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the evidence supports the existence of a suretyship agreement between the respondent and the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the notarial surety bond, when read as a whole and in conjunction with the acknowledgement of debt, does not constitute a standalone surety agreement by the respondent in favour of the appellants. The bond's primary clauses reference an acknowledgement of debt between the Trust and Johan Georg van Heerden, with no mention of the respondent as a party to the debt or as a surety. The secondary clauses must be read in context with the primary clauses, and the evidence presented, including the testimony of Johan Georg van Heerden, was found to be contradictory and unreliable. The registration of the notarial surety bond in the Deeds Office does not cure its deficiencies or...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.