South Africa Case Law

South Africa Securitisation Programme (RF) Limited v T Abrahams Transport Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (381/2023)

South Africa Securitisation Programme (RF) Limited v T Abrahams Transport Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (381/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 215 (22 May 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

381/2023

Judge

P. S. Van Zyl

The court found that the defendants had raised triable issues sufficient to resist summary judgment. The circumstances surrounding the signing of the contract, including the lack of opportunity to read, unreadability of the document, and the presence of unusual and onerous clauses not brought to the defendants' attention, warranted a trial. The defence of material misrepresentation by the agent, particularly regarding undisclosed additional costs, also raised a genuine issue for trial. The plaintiff, as cessionary, lacked personal knowledge of the contract negotiations and could not refute th…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Caveat Subscriptor
• Misrepresentation
• Exemption Clauses
• Public Policy
• Contractual Defences

City of Cape Town v Rhoode (A314/2017)

City of Cape Town v Rhoode (A314/2017) [2018] ZAWCHC 49 (17 April 2018)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A314/2017

Judges

Bozalek, Samela, Wille

The court held that the City of Cape Town owed a duty of care to users of the water slide at Mnandi Resort, given the inherent risks associated with head first descents into shallow water. The City was found negligent for failing to implement effective control mechanisms at the top of the slide to prevent head first descents, despite being aware of the danger and frequent infractions. The signage, while present, was insufficient to prevent unsafe conduct, and staff failed to intervene when the respondent assumed a kneeling position indicative of intent to descend head first. The court rejecte…

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Duty Of Care
• Apportionment Of Damages Act
• Voluntary Assumption Of Risk
• Exemption Clauses
• Public Amenities Liability

Hennox 349 CC v SA Retail Properties Limited (A5035/2013)

Hennox 349 CC v SA Retail Properties Limited (A5035/2013) [2014] ZAGPJHC 320 (10 September 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A5035/2013

Judges

Kairinos AJ, Makhanya J, Ratshivibvumo AJ

The court dismissed an appeal over repair costs after fire damage, holding that the lease’s exemption clauses barred damages and enrichment claims and that no tacit term had been proved.

• Huur Gaat Voor Koop
• Exemption Clauses
• Tacit Terms
• Specific Performance
• Unjust Enrichment
• Contractual Damages

D & E Earthworks & Plant Hire CC v Lezmin 3030 CC (37427/2009)

D & E Earthworks & Plant Hire CC v Lezmin 3030 CC (37427/2009) [2011] ZAGPPHC 92 (6 June 2011)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

37427/2009

Judge

Southwood

The High Court found the defendant solely liable for a collision between an excavator and a bridge, rejecting contributory negligence and a disclaimer defence.

• Negligence
• Apportionment Of Liability
• Contributory Negligence
• Exemption Clauses
• Contributory-negligence
• Apportionment-of-liability

Vaz Saraiva Faceira v Kempster Sedgwick (Pty) Limited (38684/2009)

Vaz Saraiva Faceira v Kempster Sedgwick (Pty) Limited (38684/2009) [2011] ZAGPPHC 4 (12 January 2011)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

38684/2009

Judge

Tuchten

The court found that the defendant did not act negligently in relation to the hijacking and loss of the vehicle. The driver, Tjalie, acted as a reasonable person would under the circumstances, prioritizing his safety over the vehicle when confronted by armed hijackers. The defendant was not required to provide additional backup or specific hijack training, as the risk of hijacking, while present, did not necessitate such measures in the context of the dealership's experience. Furthermore, the disclaimer clauses relied upon by the defendant were not contractually binding on the plaintiff, as t…

Source excerpt

• Negligence
• Risk Of Loss
• Exemption Clauses
• Contractual Liability

Swinburne v Newbee Investments (Pty) Ltd (10514/06)

Swinburne v Newbee Investments (Pty) Ltd (10514/06) [2010] ZAKZDHC 16; 2010 (5) SA 296 (KZD) ; [2010] 4 All SA 96 (KZD) (22 April 2010)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

10514/06

Judge

Wallis

The High Court held a landlord liable for injuries caused on stairs lacking a handrail and found the lease exemption clause did not clearly exclude personal-injury claims.

• Negligence
• Landlord Tenant Liability
• Exemption Clauses
• Personal Injury
• Public Policy
• Duty Of Care

Cape Group Construction (Pty) Ltd t/a Forbes Waterproofing v Government of the United Kingdom (99/2002)

Cape Group Construction (Pty) Ltd t/a Forbes Waterproofing v Government of the United Kingdom (99/2002) [2003] ZASCA 51; [2003] 3 All SA 496 (SCA); 2003 (5) SA 180 (SCA) (23 May 2003)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

99/2002

Judges

Schutz, Cloete, Heher

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Forbes's standard terms and conditions, including the exemption clause, were not incorporated into the contract with the Government. The reference to 'See Terms and Conditions Overleaf' in the faxed quotation was insufficient, as only one page was sent and there was no 'overleaf'. The court found that the natural and objective interpretation of the fax was that no additional terms applied. Even if incorporation was arguable, Forbes failed to take reasonable steps to bring the exemption clause to the Government's attention, as required by the 'ticket' case…

Source excerpt

• Incorporation Of Standard Terms
• Exemption Clauses
• Quasi Mutual Assent
• Contractual Construction

Gabriel and Another v Enchanted Bed and Breakfast CC (5566/2001)

Gabriel and Another v Enchanted Bed and Breakfast CC (5566/2001) [2002] ZAWCHC 40; 2002 (6) SA 597 (C) (2 August 2002)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

5566/2001

Judge

R B Cleaver

High Court case on innkeeper strict liability for a guest-room burglary, rejecting the defendant’s reliance on notices, alleged guest negligence, and contributory negligence.

• Praetorian Edict Liability
• Innkeeper Strict Liability
• Negligence
• Exemption Clauses
• Contributory Negligence
• Innkeeper-strict-liability

Compagnie Inter Africaine De Tranvaux, South African Branch v Abercom Africa (Pty) Ltd. (60/1984)

Compagnie Inter Africaine De Tranvaux, South African Branch v Abercom Africa (Pty) Ltd. (60/1984) [1985] ZASCA 60 (30 May 1985)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

60/1984

Judges

Botha, Kotze, Cillie, Hoexter, Grosskopf

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the written agreement did not contain specifications so detailed as to exclude the implication of a tacit term regarding fitness for purpose. The exemption clause (clause 4) was interpreted narrowly and found not to apply to breaches going to the root of the contract, such as the supply of locomotives that required extensive redesign and rebuilding. The Court found that the tacit term alleged by the appellant was not wholly irreconcilable with the express terms of the contract and could operate independently in the area not covered by the guarantee. The a…

Source excerpt

• Tacit Terms
• Exemption Clauses
• Aedilitian Remedies
• Breach Of Contract
• Damages For Defective Goods