South Africa Case Law

Titan Asset Management (Pty) Ltd and Others v Lanzerac Estate Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (2102 / 2020)

Titan Asset Management (Pty) Ltd and Others v Lanzerac Estate Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (2102 / 2020) [2023] ZAWCHC 136; [2023] 3 All SA 589 (WCC) (9 June 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2102 / 2020

Judge

Binns-Ward

High Court held that fraud-based rescission was not barred by contract clauses, and that the plaintiffs’ restitution tender raised trial issues.

• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Rescission Of Contract
• Restitution
• Exception Procedure
• Non Joinder
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses

Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd v Netluk Boerdery CC and Another (2011/10152)

Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd v Netluk Boerdery CC and Another (2011/10152) [2011] ZAGPJHC 87 (3 August 2011)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2011/10152

Judge

L P Halgryn

The High Court held that Auction Alliance deliberately misrepresented the property sold at auction, so exclusion clauses could not bar the respondents’ fraud defence.

• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses
• Auction Sale
• Rescission And Restitution
• Suretyship Liability
• Fraudulent-misrepresentation

Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd v Netluk Boerdery CC and Another (2011/10152)

Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd v Netluk Boerdery CC and Another (2011/10152) [2011] ZAGPJHC 62 (30 June 2011)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2011/10152

Judge

L P Halgryn

The court found that the Applicant deliberately misrepresented material facts about the auctioned property in both advertisements and auction documents, knowing these representations were false and intending the Respondents to rely on them. The Respondents were in fact induced by these misrepresentations to bid for and purchase the property. The Applicant's reliance on exclusionary clauses was rejected, as such clauses cannot shield a party from liability for fraud. The Respondents successfully established all elements of fraudulent misrepresentation on a balance of probabilities, entitling t…

Source excerpt

• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses
• Auctioneer Liability
• Rescission And Restitution

St Paul Insurance Co. SA Ltd v Eagle Ink System (Cape) (Pty) Ltd (300/08)

St Paul Insurance Co. SA Ltd v Eagle Ink System (Cape) (Pty) Ltd (300/08) [2009] ZASCA 53; 2010 (3) SA 647 (SCA) ; [2009] 4 All SA 46 (SCA) (27 May 2009)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

300/08

Judges

Farlam, Cloete, Lewis, Mhlantla, Tshiqi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that lead contamination in ink fell within a policy exclusion, so the insurer was not liable to indemnify Eagle Ink.

• Insurance Policy Interpretation
• Public Liability
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses
• Contamination Definition
• Insurance-policy-interpretation
• Public-liability-insurance

Potgieter v British Airways Plc (7154/03)

Potgieter v British Airways Plc (7154/03) [2005] ZAWCHC 5; 2005 (3) SA 133 (C) (25 January 2005)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7154/03

Judge

Davis

The court held that the Warsaw Convention, as incorporated into South African law, provides the exclusive cause of action and sole remedy for passengers seeking damages arising out of international carriage by air. The Convention limits liability to cases of death, wounding, or bodily injury sustained on board the aircraft or during embarkation or disembarkation. Claims for humiliation, impairment of dignity, or psychological harm, absent bodily injury, are not sustainable under South African law in this context. The court found that the interpretation adopted by the UK House of Lords and the…

Source excerpt

• International Carriage By Air
• Warsaw Convention Exclusivity
• Bodily Injury Limitation
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses

Van Zyl NO v Kiln Non-Marine Syndicate No 510 of Lloyds of London (216/2001)

Van Zyl NO v Kiln Non-Marine Syndicate No 510 of Lloyds of London (216/2001) [2002] ZASCA 120; [2002] 4 All SA 355 (SCA); 2003 (2) SA 440 (SCA) (26 September 2002)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

216/2001

Judges

Nienaber, Schutz, Cameron, Brand, Heher

The Supreme Court of Appeal considered whether a fatal car crash after drinking was an accident and whether the policy exclusion for wilful exposure to danger applied.

• Insurance Policy Interpretation
• Wilful Exposure To Danger
• Accidental Death
• Onus Of Proof
• Contractual Exclusion Clauses
• Insurance-law

Van Der Westhuizen v Arnold (414/2000)

Van Der Westhuizen v Arnold (414/2000) [2002] ZASCA 82; [2002] 4 All SA 331 (SCA); 2002 (6) SA 453 (SCA) (29 August 2002)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

414/2000

Judges

Marais, Heher, Lewis

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a general no-warranties clause did not clearly exclude the implied warranty against eviction in a vehicle sale.

• Contractual Exclusion Clauses
• Implied Warranty Against Eviction
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Voetstoots Sale
• Contra Proferentem
• Damages For Eviction