South Africa Case Law

Grainco (Pty) Ltd v Broodryk NO and Others (1300/2009)

Grainco (Pty) Ltd v Broodryk NO and Others (1300/2009) [2009] ZAFSHC 143; 2012 (4) SA 517 (FB) (18 June 2009)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1300/2009

Judge

C.B. Cillié, R

The court found that the acknowledgment of debt was sufficiently liquid for the capital amount of R359,638.13, as it constituted an unequivocal admission of liability by the trust, and the certificate mechanism provided prima facie proof of the outstanding balance. However, the interest component was not readily ascertainable without external evidence, and thus provisional sentence could not be granted for interest. The court accepted that the first defendant had general authority from the second defendant to act on behalf of the trust, based on longstanding conduct and the nature of the trus…

Source excerpt

• Provisional Sentence
• Liquid Document
• Trustee Authority
• National Credit Act
• Holder In Due Course
• Personal Defence On Cheque

African Bank Limited t/a ab Commerce v Covmark Marketing cc t/a Covmark Marketing and Others (9238/2005, 10785/2005)

African Bank Limited t/a ab Commerce v Covmark Marketing cc t/a Covmark Marketing and Others (9238/2005, 10785/2005) [2008] ZAKZHC 65; 2008 (6) SA 46 (D); (6 August 2008)

Court

High Courts - Kwazulu Natal

Case number

9238/2005, 10785/2005

Judge

Moosa AJ

The High Court determined costs after a split hearing, ordering each side to bear its own costs for the Rule 33(4) separation application and awarding later costs to the respondents.

• Costs Award
• Rule 33 4 Separation
• Holder In Due Course
• Allocation Of Costs
• Costs-order
• Rule-33-4-separation

African Bank Limited t/a ab Commerce v Covmark Marketing cc t/a Covmark Marketing and Others (9238/2005, 10785/2005)

African Bank Limited t/a ab Commerce v Covmark Marketing cc t/a Covmark Marketing and Others (9238/2005, 10785/2005) [2008] ZAKZHC 36; 2008 (6) SA 46 (D) (4 April 2008)

Court

High Courts - Kwazulu Natal

Case number

9238/2005, 10785/2005

Judge

Moosa AJ

The court considered whether African Bank was a holder in due course of three post-dated cheques and whether special endorsements made them irregular under the Bills of Exchange Act.

• Bills Of Exchange Act
• Holder In Due Course
• Material Alteration
• Endorsement Irregularity
• Rule 33 4 Separation
• Cheque Liability

A Melamed Finance (Pty) Ltd v Voc Investments Ltd (364/05)

A Melamed Finance (Pty) Ltd v Voc Investments Ltd (364/05) [2006] ZASCA 148; 2008 (6) SA 506 (SCA) (31 May 2006)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

364/05

Judges

Scott, Zulman, Brand, Conradie, Cloete

A cheque with a patent date alteration was held not regular on its face, so the holder could not be a holder in due course under the Bills of Exchange Act.

• Bills Of Exchange Act
• Holder In Due Course
• Material Alteration
• Cheque Irregularity
• Bills-of-exchange
• Holder-in-due-course

Ramsukh v Diesel-Electric (Natal) Pty Ltd (601/95)

Ramsukh v Diesel-Electric (Natal) Pty Ltd (601/95) [1997] ZASCA 56; 1997 (4) SA 242 (SCA); [1997] 3 All SA 209 (A); (28 May 1997)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

601/95

Judges

Van Heerden, Smalberger, Vivier, Howie, Plewman

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the payee of a bearer cheque can be a holder in due course and dismissed the appeal with costs.

• Bills Of Exchange Act
• Holder In Due Course
• Bearer Instrument
• Negotiation Of Cheque
• Provisional Sentence
• Holder-in-due-course

Sappi Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd. v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd. (210/95)

Sappi Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd. v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd. (210/95) [1996] ZASCA 123; 1997 (1) SA 457 (SCA); [1996] 4 All SA 487 (A); (1 October 1996)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

210/95

Judges

Hefer, Eksteen, Howie, Schutz, Zulman

The court held that signatures on the reverse of two bills constituted a valid endorsement by the appellant, and the Fund was a holder in due course.

• Bills Of Exchange
• Holder In Due Course
• Endorsement Requirements
• Negotiable Instruments
• Holder-in-due-course
• Bills-of-exchange

Van Tonder en Andere v Vorster (541/94)

Van Tonder en Andere v Vorster (541/94) [1996] ZASCA 32; 1996 (3) SA 383 (SCA); [1996] 2 All SA 229 (A); (27 March 1996)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

541/94

Judges

Botha, E M Grosskopf, Harms, Scott, Plewman

The court held that evidence was admissible to show that cheques were endorsed by an agent acting under authority, so the respondent remained entitled to judgment.

• Negotiable Instruments
• Holder In Due Course
• Parol Evidence Rule
• Agency
• Endorsement Of Cheques
• Negotiable-instruments

Matzopoulos v BEC Engineering (663/87)

Matzopoulos v BEC Engineering (663/87) [1989] ZASCA 69 (29 May 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

663/87

Judges

Joubert, Hefer, Steyn, Eksteen, Nicholas

The appellate court upheld judgment for the appellant on a dishonoured cheque, holding the respondent failed to prove an alleged payment condition.

• Holder In Due Course
• Conditional Cheque
• Burden Of Proof
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Conditional-cheque
• Holder-for-value

Taylor v Devine (122/82/AV)

Taylor v Devine (122/82/AV) [1984] ZASCA 7 (2 March 1984)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

122/82/AV

Judges

Miller, Cillié, Nicholas

The Appellate Division dismissed Taylor’s appeal, holding that he failed to prove conditions attached to a R3,000 cheque or lack of value.

• Negotiable Instruments
• Holder In Due Course
• Onus Of Proof
• Negotiable-instruments
• Holder-in-due-course
• Onus-of-proof