Werlex Properties (Pty) Ltd v Marketing and Graphic Media Company (Pty) Ltd (2010/30319) [2012] ZAGPJHC 31 (23 February 2012)

Werlex Properties (Pty) Ltd v Marketing and Graphic Media Company (Pty) Ltd (2010/30319) [2012] ZAGPJHC 31 (23 February 2012)

The court found that, based on the conduct of the parties, the content of their communications, and the surrounding circumstances, it was the intention of both parties that a binding lease agreement would only come into existence upon signature of a written contract and payment of the required deposit. The emails exchanged constituted negotiations and proposals, not a concluded agreement. The plaintiff failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that a partly written and partly oral agreement was entered into on 2 February 2009. Consequently, the claim for damages arising from breach of contract was dismissed. Regarding installation costs for dry-walling, the plaintiff failed to...

Citation
[2012] ZAGPJHC 31
Parties
Plaintiff: Werlex Properties (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: The Marketing and Graphic Media Company (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 February 2012
Case Number
2010/30319
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for damages arising from breach of contract is dismissed with costs. Defendant is absolved from the instance in respect of installation costs for dry-walling, with costs.
Judges
Tsoka
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Lease Agreement, Repudiation, Installation Costs, Absolution From Instance

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Werlex Properties (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

The Marketing and Graphic Media Company (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

  1. 1 Whether a partly written and partly oral lease agreement was entered into between the parties on 2 February 2009.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable for damages arising from alleged breach of contract.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is liable for installation costs, specifically dry-walling.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, based on the conduct of the parties, the content of their communications, and the surrounding circumstances, it was the intention of both parties that a binding lease agreement would only come into existence upon signature of a written contract and payment of the required deposit. The emails exchanged constituted negotiations and proposals, not a concluded agreement. The plaintiff failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that a partly written and partly oral agreement was entered into on 2 February 2009. Consequently, the claim for damages arising from breach of contract was dismissed. Regarding installation costs for dry-walling, the plaintiff failed to...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for damages arising from breach of contract is dismissed with costs. Defendant is absolved from the instance in respect of installation costs for dry-walling, with costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff’s Claim A in the sum of R652 605 plus VAT is dismissed with costs.
  • In respect of Claim B, the installation costs with regard to the dry-walling, the defendant is absolved from the instance with costs.