Umzinyathi District Municipality v Fusion Guarantees (Pty) Ltd (23247/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 754 (22 May 2025)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
23247/2019
Judge
De Souza-Spagnolettei
The High Court held that a performance guarantee was autonomous and enforceable on the plaintiff’s written demand, ordering the defendant to pay the guaranteed sum, interest, and costs.
Bombardier Africa Alliance Consortium v Lombard Insurance Company Limited and Another (A222/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 554; 2021 (1) SA 397 (GP) (7 October 2020)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A222/2019
Judges
P.A. Meyer, Fourie, Basson
The court held that Bombardier failed to establish a prima facie right to the interim interdict. The guarantee was an autonomous contract, requiring only a written demand and return of the original guarantee for payment. The guarantee did not require the demand to state that Bombardier had failed to fulfil its obligations. The fraud exception did not apply, as Bombardier's allegations did not prima facie establish fraud; PRASA's conduct related to the underlying contract and not to misrepresentation of material facts to Lombard. The Dispute Adjudication Board's decision and any arbitral award…
Compass Insurance Company Limited v Cobus Smit Projekbestuur CC and Another; C S Property Group (Pty) Ltd v H W Brokers (Pty) Ltd and Another (14667/2014; 9202/2017) [2018] ZAWCHC 114; 2019 (1) SA 413 (WCC) (10 September 2018)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
14667/2014; 9202/2017
Judge
Y S Meer
The court found that although a guarantee contract is autonomous and independent, it may reflect the common intention of the insurer, beneficiary, and contractor. The contractor, though not a signatory, was instrumental in the arrangements leading to the guarantee and its terms. The authorities, particularly Dormell Properties and Meyer v Merchant’s Trust, support the principle that rectification is available where the document embodies the common intention of all parties, even if not signed by all. The amendment sought by the Defendants raises a triable issue regarding the rectification of t…
Coface South Africa Insurance Co Ltd v East London Own Haven t/a Own Haven Housing Association (050/2013) [2013] ZASCA 202; [2014] 1 All SA 536 (SCA); 2014 (2) SA 382 (SCA) (2 December 2013)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
050/2013
Judges
Navsa, Maya, Malan, Pillay, Swain
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the construction guarantee issued by Coface was unconditional and autonomous, and must be honoured upon proper demand by the beneficiary, regardless of disputes under the principal construction contract. The only permissible defence to payment under such a guarantee is fraud, which was not alleged or proven in this case. The court found that the majority decision in Dormell Properties v Renasa Insurance NNO was clearly wrong and reaffirmed the established principle that disputes relating to the underlying contract do not affect the liability of the guaran…
