South Africa Case Law

Dominick v Nedbank Limited (20463/14)

Dominick v Nedbank Limited (20463/14) [2015] ZASCA 160 (13 November 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20463/14

Judges

Mpati, Cachalia, Petse, Dambuza, Gorven

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants, as sureties, were not entitled to release from their obligations under the suretyship agreements. The court found that any prejudice suffered by the appellants did not result from a breach of legal duty or obligation by Nedbank. The bank acted within its rights under the principal agreement and the suretyships, including the extension of overdraft facilities and the application of set-off. The transfers from the overdraft account to the Agri account were made at the request of Puricare or its attorneys, and Nedbank was not in breach of any…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship Liability
• Prejudice To Surety
• Set Off
• Extension Of Banking Facilities
• Release Of Surety