Visser and Another v Moore (27676/2014) [2019] ZAGPPHC 426 (30 August 2019)

Visser and Another v Moore (27676/2014) [2019] ZAGPPHC 426 (30 August 2019)

The court found that Moore unlawfully repudiated the lease agreement and disposed of the plaintiffs' assets, depriving Visser of his tools and ability to earn income. The plaintiffs' claim was based on damages flowing from the repudiation, not on splitting causes of action. The delay in instituting action was adequately explained and did not bar the claim. The Apportionment of Damages Act does not apply to post-delictual conduct, and mitigation of loss was not pleaded by the defendant. The quantification of damages was based on expert evidence, with a high contingency applied to account for uncertainties such as Visser's health. The court awarded damages for both past and future loss of...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 426
Parties
Plaintiff: Gerhard Visser; Plaintiff: Estate of the Late Johan Visser; Defendant: Moore, WR t/a Goodwill Solutions
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 August 2019
Case Number
27676/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant is ordered to pay damages, interest, and costs.
Judges
Potterill
Legal Topics
Unlawful Eviction, Repudiation of Contract, Quantification of Damages, Mitigation of Loss, Actio Ad Exhibendum, Remoteness of Damage
Land and Property Delict Civil Procedure Unlawful Eviction Repudiation of Contract Quantification of Damages Mitigation of Loss Actio Ad Exhibendum +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerhard Visser

Plaintiff

Estate of the Late Johan Visser

Plaintiff

Moore, WR t/a Goodwill Solutions

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant unlawfully repudiated the lease agreement and disposed of the plaintiffs' assets.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to damages for loss of tools and consequential loss of income.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in instituting action or replacing tools bars or reduces the plaintiffs' claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Moore unlawfully repudiated the lease agreement and disposed of the plaintiffs' assets, depriving Visser of his tools and ability to earn income. The plaintiffs' claim was based on damages flowing from the repudiation, not on splitting causes of action. The delay in instituting action was adequately explained and did not bar the claim. The Apportionment of Damages Act does not apply to post-delictual conduct, and mitigation of loss was not pleaded by the defendant. The quantification of damages was based on expert evidence, with a high contingency applied to account for uncertainties such as Visser's health. The court awarded damages for both past and future loss of...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant is ordered to pay damages, interest, and costs.

Orders

  • The defendant must pay to the plaintiff an amount of R446,209.00.
  • Interest on the amount at the rate of the Prescribed Interest Rate Act a tempore more.