South Africa Case Law

Route Management (Pty) Ltd t/a Bauer v Misty Sea Trading 296 (Pty) Ltd t/a Project Logistics Management (A167/2023)

Route Management (Pty) Ltd t/a Bauer v Misty Sea Trading 296 (Pty) Ltd t/a Project Logistics Management (A167/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 69 (21 February 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A167/2023

Judges

Mbhele, Van Rhyn, Grobler

The court found that the transaction between Route, Project Logistics, and Reichmans Capital was a tripartite arrangement involving manufacture, sale, and finance, with each agreement interlinked and interdependent. The manufacturing agreement governed the relationship between Route and Project Logistics, and the standard terms and conditions applied, exempting Route from liability for defects arising from Project Logistics' specifications. The evidence showed that Route delivered the trailer as requested, and Project Logistics failed to prove any breach of the manufacturing agreement. The co…

Source excerpt

• Manufacturing Contract
• Exemption Clause
• Tripartite Transaction
• Breach Of Contract
• Absolution From The Instance

Brough Capital (Pty) Ltd and Other v Lester Connock Commemoration Fund (Application for Leave to Appeal) (28646/2020)

Brough Capital (Pty) Ltd and Other v Lester Connock Commemoration Fund (Application for Leave to Appeal) (28646/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 999 (17 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

28646/2020

Judge

MA Makume

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success against findings of gross negligence and liability under the investment mandate.

• Leave To Appeal
• Gross Negligence
• Exemption Clause
• Investment Management Mandate
• Leave-to-appeal
• Gross-negligence

Schenker South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Fujitsu Services Core (Pty) Ltd (508/2020)

Schenker South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Fujitsu Services Core (Pty) Ltd (508/2020) [2022] ZASCA 7 (18 January 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

508/2020

Judges

Dambuza, Gorven, Mothle, Smith, Phatshoane

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the exemption clauses in the contract between Schenker and Fujitsu were clear and unambiguous in excluding liability for any claim, whether in contract or delict, including those arising from theft by Schenker's employees. The goods in question were 'valuables' as defined in the contract, and no special arrangements had been made by Fujitsu to mitigate the risk. The court found that the language of the exemption clauses was sufficiently wide to include deliberate and intentional acts by Schenker's employees. The court distinguished the present case from G…

Source excerpt

• Exemption Clause
• Vicarious Liability
• Contractual Interpretation
• Theft By Employee

Tower Property Fund Limited v Unitools CC and Another (2020/19245)

Tower Property Fund Limited v Unitools CC and Another (2020/19245) [2021] ZAGPJHC 683 (22 October 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/19245

Judge

Gotz AJ

The court found that Tower's claim for unpaid rental and related charges is for a liquidated amount and is supported by the written lease agreement. The defendants' four defences—misrepresentation, loss of beneficial occupation, breach of lease, and delictual counterclaim—were each considered and rejected. The alleged misrepresentation related to future events and was not pleaded as fraudulent, and the lease expressly excluded reliance on representations not contained in the agreement. The exceptio non adimpleti contractus was unavailable due to clauses requiring rent to be paid in advance an…

Source excerpt

• Commercial Lease
• Summary Judgment
• Exemption Clause
• Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus
• Guarantee Liability
• Abatement Of Rent

UPS SCS South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Hendrik Cornelis van Wyk t/a Skydive Mossel Bay (421/2020; 422/2020)

UPS SCS South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Hendrik Cornelis van Wyk t/a Skydive Mossel Bay (421/2020; 422/2020) [2021] ZASCA 131 (1 October 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

421/2020; 422/2020

Judges

Ponnan, Wallis, Saldulker, Mokgohloa, Mabindla-Boqwana

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that UPS’s exemption clauses did not form part of the carriage contract and dismissed the appeal with costs.

• Contract Of Carriage
• Exemption Clause
• Consumer Protection Act
• Quantum Of Damages
• Contract-of-carriage
• Exemption-clause

Stearns v Robispec (Pty) Ltd (27949/2017)

Stearns v Robispec (Pty) Ltd (27949/2017) [2020] ZAGPJHC 42 (9 March 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

27949/2017

Judge

P.A. Meyer

The court found that the defendant negligently breached its duty of care by failing to implement a formal inspection and maintenance system for racks and shelves, which were subject to wear and tear and not properly secured. The plaintiff's conduct in bumping the rack was not negligent, as such contact is common and the racks are designed to withstand it. His instinctive attempt to prevent the rack from falling was reasonable under the circumstances and did not amount to contributory negligence. The disclaimer notice was not sufficiently prominent or clear to bind the plaintiff to its terms.…

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Occupier Liability
• Exemption Clause
• Contributory Negligence
• Causation
• Duty Of Care

Anani Training Enterprise (PTY) LTD and Another v Transnet Limited and Others (2307/2016)

Anani Training Enterprise (PTY) LTD and Another v Transnet Limited and Others (2307/2016) [2018] ZANCHC 62 (21 May 2018)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

2307/2016

Judge

Phatshoane

The court found that Anani Training proved ownership of the equipment, but Transnet was exempted from liability for its loss or release under the clear and unambiguous exemption clause in the lease, which covered both negligence and gross negligence. Transnet's conduct did not amount to negligence given Anani Training's abandonment of the premises and lack of communication. Mr Veldman, having removed equipment without Anani Training's consent, is liable to restore possession of all equipment he took. The alternative claim for payment of the equipment's value was rejected as the equipment was…

Source excerpt

• Lease Agreement
• Exemption Clause
• Unlawful Occupation
• Prescription Of Debt
• Indemnity
• Damages

Rhoode v City of Cape Town (23341/2011)

Rhoode v City of Cape Town (23341/2011) [2017] ZAWCHC 160 (29 June 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

23341/2011

Judge

Ndita

The High Court held the City of Cape Town liable for 60% of a plaintiff’s damages after a water-slide injury at Mnandi Resort, finding negligence and an ineffective disclaimer.

• Negligence
• Duty Of Care
• Apportionment Of Damages
• Voluntary Assumption Of Risk
• Exemption Clause
• Public Policy

Malesela Taihan Electric Cable (Pty) Ltd v Fidelity Security Services (Pty) Ltd (17193/2014)

Malesela Taihan Electric Cable (Pty) Ltd v Fidelity Security Services (Pty) Ltd (17193/2014) [2017] ZAGPJHC 332 (18 April 2017)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

17193/2014

Judge

P.A. Meyer

The court found that Fidelity's security guards were grossly negligent and complicit in the theft of copper coils from the plaintiff's premises, and that Fidelity is contractually liable to reimburse the plaintiff for the full extent of its loss under clause 9 of the contract. The limitation of liability clause in the contract is partially illegal and unenforceable to the extent that it purports to limit Fidelity's liability for intentional or grossly negligent acts, as prohibited by sub-regulation 9(3)(d) of the Code of Conduct and section 28(2) of the Private Security Industry Regulation Ac…

Source excerpt

• Specific Performance
• Contractual Liability
• Exemption Clause
• Gross Negligence
• Private Security Regulation
• Public Policy

H & H Gear Repair Centre v Boating International CC (17501/2014)

H & H Gear Repair Centre v Boating International CC (17501/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 122 (24 March 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

17501/2014

Judge

H J Fabricius

The High Court held that the plaintiff was bound by an indemnity clause on a signed job card and dismissed the claim with costs.

• Contract Of Depositum
• Exemption Clause
• Indemnity Clause
• Authority Of Agent
• Exemption-clauses
• Indemnity-clauses