Whyte v Couto (2) (97/85) [1985] ZASCA 82 (13 September 1985)

Whyte v Couto (2) (97/85) [1985] ZASCA 82 (13 September 1985)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that clause 4(b) of the contract of sale required only that the lessor express agreement to grant a lease to the purchaser for the stipulated period and option to renew, not the actual conclusion of a lease contract. The evidence established that Trasu Properties, through Mr. Levy, was willing to grant the lease and option, and the respondent's husband accepted the terms. The respondent's subsequent objections to the lease terms were unsupported by evidence and appeared to be attempts to avoid contractual obligations. The court found that all defences raised by the respondent were either abandoned or without merit, and that the allegations of fraud and...

Citation
[1985] ZASCA 82
Parties
Appellant: Percival Whyte; Respondent: Fernanda Spares da Costa Couto
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 1985
Case Number
97/85
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; magistrate's judgment reinstated.
Judges
Jansen, Trengove, Joubert, Howard, Grosskopf
Legal Topics
Contractual Conditions, Lease Agreements, Specific Performance, Interpretation of Contracts
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Contractual Conditions Lease Agreements Specific Performance Interpretation of Contracts

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

Parties

Percival Whyte

Appellant

Fernanda Spares da Costa Couto

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct interpretation of clause 4(b) of the contract of sale regarding the lessor's agreement to grant a lease.
  2. 2 Whether the condition in clause 4(b) was fulfilled by the lessor's conduct.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's defences based on clause 4(b) were valid or vexatious.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that clause 4(b) of the contract of sale required only that the lessor express agreement to grant a lease to the purchaser for the stipulated period and option to renew, not the actual conclusion of a lease contract. The evidence established that Trasu Properties, through Mr. Levy, was willing to grant the lease and option, and the respondent's husband accepted the terms. The respondent's subsequent objections to the lease terms were unsupported by evidence and appeared to be attempts to avoid contractual obligations. The court found that all defences raised by the respondent were either abandoned or without merit, and that the allegations of fraud and...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; magistrate's judgment reinstated.

Orders

  • The order of the Transvaal Provincial Division is altered to read: Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • The order of the magistrate is reinstated: judgment is entered for the plaintiff for R800.00 with interest at 11% per annum from 2 July 1980 to date of payment, and costs as between attorney and client.