South Africa Case Law

Prag N.O and Another v Trustees for the time being of the Mitchell's Plain Industrial Enterprises Sectional Title Scheme Body Corporate and Others (A260/2020)

Prag N.O and Another v Trustees for the time being of the Mitchell's Plain Industrial Enterprises Sectional Title Scheme Body Corporate and Others (A260/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 132; 2021 (5) SA 623 (WCC) (16 July 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A260/2020

Judges

M Sher, VC Saldanha

The court held that the CSOS adjudicator lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Trust's claim for damages and lost rental, as these were personal claims relating to the Trust's individual section and did not affect the common interests of the sectional title scheme. The statutory duty to insure buildings under the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act is intended to protect the collective interests of all owners, not to create a right for individual owners to claim damages from the body corporate for losses to their own section. The CSOS Act does not empower the Ombud or adjudicator to adjudi…

Source excerpt

• Community Schemes Ombud Service Act
• Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act
• Statutory Jurisdiction
• Delictual Claims
• Insurance Obligations
• Damages

G & C Shelf 103 (Pty) Ltd v Chemical Specialities (Pty) Ltd (5902/2008)

G & C Shelf 103 (Pty) Ltd v Chemical Specialities (Pty) Ltd (5902/2008) [2011] ZAKZDHC 88 (24 August 2011)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

5902/2008

Judge

Rall AJ

The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant breached clause 14.4 of the lease agreement, as the plaintiff did not place the defendant in mora by giving the required notice to perform its obligations. The lease agreement did not stipulate a fixed time for performance, and in such cases, interpellatio is necessary before damages can be claimed. The only demand made by the plaintiff was a letter of demand for damages, not a notice to perform. Furthermore, even if the defendant had breached its obligations under clauses 14.3 and 14.5, the plaintiff suffered no damages bec…

Source excerpt

• Breach Of Contract
• Lease Agreement
• Insurance Obligations
• Damages
• Collateral Source Rule

Imperial Group (Pty) Ltd. v NCS Resins (Pty) Ltd. (197/06)

Imperial Group (Pty) Ltd. v NCS Resins (Pty) Ltd. (197/06) [2007] ZASCA 13; [2007] SCA 13 (RSA) ; [2007] 2 All SA 483 (SCA) (20 March 2007)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

197/06

Judges

Scott, Cameron, Cloete, Ponnan, Mlambo

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that clause 9.6 of the contract expressly imposes liability on Imperial for damage caused by breach of contract, including fire, unless Imperial proves the damage was caused by NCS's fault. Clause 11.6, which obliges NCS to insure its stock against fire and natural disasters, does not qualify or override clause 9.6. The obligation to insure does not, in this context, transfer the risk of fire to NCS, nor does it preclude NCS's insurers from recovering by subrogation against Imperial. The contract's structure and language do not support Imperial's contention th…

Source excerpt

• Contractual Risk Allocation
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Warehousing Agreements
• Insurance Obligations

Afcol Manufacturing Ltd. v Afrifurn Industries CC (652/96)

Afcol Manufacturing Ltd. v Afrifurn Industries CC (652/96) [1998] ZASCA 88 (28 September 1998)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

652/96

Judges

Hoexter, Howie, Scott, Zulman, Ngoepe

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the seller’s insurance obligation did not require cover at market or replacement value, and the buyer failed to prove a tacit term.

• Contract Interpretation
• Tacit Terms
• Insurance Obligations
• Sale Of Goods
• Contract-interpretation
• Tacit-terms