South Africa Case Law

RAM Transport (South Africa) Proprietary Limited t/a RAM Hand -To-Hand Couriers v DHL Supply Chain (South Africa) Proprietary Limited (20232/2020)

RAM Transport (South Africa) Proprietary Limited t/a RAM Hand -To-Hand Couriers v DHL Supply Chain (South Africa) Proprietary Limited (20232/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 802 (18 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

20232/2020

Judge

N Manoim

High Court granted a Rule 33(4) separation, ordering quantum to be heard separately from the merits in a damages claim over pharmaceutical services.

• Separation Of Issues
• Contractual Damages
• Quantum Of Damages
• Case Management
• Urgent Application
• Quasi Mutual Consent

Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd v Du Toit NO and Others (4849/2008)

Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd v Du Toit NO and Others (4849/2008) [2009] ZAFSHC 93 (25 September 2009)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4849/2008

Judge

Kruger R

The court found that the fifth respondent was a trustee in name only, had no involvement in the trust's business, and was pressured by his brother (co-trustee) to sign a large bundle of documents without explanation. The suretyship was not made conspicuous, and the fifth respondent had no reason to expect a personal suretyship among the documents. The applicant did not negotiate with the fifth respondent or request any financial information that would be expected if a personal suretyship was intended. The misrepresentation by the co-trustee (Henk) was material, and the fifth respondent's erro…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship
• Justus Error
• Quasi Mutual Consent
• Trustee Liability
• Misrepresentation
• Burden Of Proof

Kuehne and Nagel (Proprietary) Ltd v Breathetex Corporation (Proprietary) Ltd (1921/06)

Kuehne and Nagel (Proprietary) Ltd v Breathetex Corporation (Proprietary) Ltd (1921/06) [2007] ZAECHC 89; [2008] 2 All SA 446 (SE) (15 November 2007)

Court

High Courts - Eastern Cape

Case number

1921/06

Judge

A.R. Erasmus

The court held that the signed credit application incorporated the SAAFF trading conditions, and entered judgment for the plaintiff.

• Contract Interpretation
• Parol Evidence Rule
• Quasi Mutual Consent
• Caveat Subscriptor
• Standard Terms
• Reasonable Steps To Notify