South Africa Case Law

Verni-Speciality Construction Projects (PTY) Ltd v Ahlstrom Structural Design Engineers (PTY) Ltd and Another (23819/2019)

Verni-Speciality Construction Projects (PTY) Ltd v Ahlstrom Structural Design Engineers (PTY) Ltd and Another (23819/2019) [2022] ZAGPJHC 443 (4 July 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

23819/2019

Judge

Fisher

High Court held the defendant personally liable for goods and services supplied, rejecting an unproven agency defence and awarding the claim with interest and costs.

• Agency
• Undisclosed Principal
• Contractual Liability
• Quantum Of Damages
• Undisclosed-principal
• Contractual-liability

Money Box Investments 268 (Pty) Ltd v Easy Greens Farming and Farm Produce CC (A221/2019)

Money Box Investments 268 (Pty) Ltd v Easy Greens Farming and Farm Produce CC (A221/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 599 (16 September 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A221/2019

Judges

Raulinga, Basson, Strijdom

Appeal dismissed against refusal to rescind a default judgment. The court held the rescission application was not brought timeously and no bona fide defence was shown.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Condonation
• Locus Standi
• Undisclosed Principal
• Second Hand Goods Act
• Rescission-of-judgment

Starways Trading 21 CC and Others v Pearl Island Trading 714 (Pty) Ltd and Another (232/2018)

Starways Trading 21 CC and Others v Pearl Island Trading 714 (Pty) Ltd and Another (232/2018) [2018] ZASCA 177; 2019 (2) SA 650 (SCA) (3 December 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

232/2018

Judges

Lewis, Wallis, Zondi, Van der Merwe, Matojane

The SCA held that “ex warehouse” did not exclude section 59 of the Customs and Excise Act, and Starways repudiated the sugar contract by insisting on full payment.

• Contract Interpretation
• Implied Terms
• Repudiation
• Customs And Excise
• Undisclosed Principal
• Contract-interpretation

Starways Trading 21 CC v Pearl Island Trading 714 (Pty) Ltd (22002/2016)

Starways Trading 21 CC v Pearl Island Trading 714 (Pty) Ltd (22002/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 88; [2017] 4 All SA 568 (WCC) (26 July 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

22002/2016

Judge

Davis

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the phrase 'ex-warehouse' in the contract constituted an agreement to the contrary under section 59(2) of the Customs & Excise Act. The evidence showed that 'ex-warehouse' was used synonymously with collection from the applicant's premises, not as a technical term altering risk or price adjustment. The applicant's arguments relied heavily on academic analysis without sufficient factual support from the record. Regarding repudiation, the applicant's refusal to permit a reduction in contract price, as required by the statutory implie…

Source excerpt

• Contract Interpretation
• Repudiation
• Tripartite Agreement
• Customs And Excise
• Leave To Appeal
• Undisclosed Principal

Instand Trade 110 CC v Lewis and Others (AR 247/13)

Instand Trade 110 CC v Lewis and Others (AR 247/13) [2013] ZAKZPHC 58 (25 October 2013)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR 247/13

Judges

Koen, Vahed, Nkosi

The court held that the tenant had a prima facie right of first refusal and that the first respondent was bound as an undisclosed principal.

• Right Of First Refusal
• Undisclosed Principal
• Interim Interdict
• Lease Renewal
• Agency
• Alienation Of Land Act

Potgieter v Sasol chemiese Nywerhede Beperk (A787/12)

Potgieter v Sasol chemiese Nywerhede Beperk (A787/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 254 (16 August 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A787/12

Judges

A A Lamprecht, NV Khumalo

Appeal dismissed in a fertilizer debt dispute. The court held Sasol had standing and that Potgieter remained liable under agency and undisclosed principal principles.

• Agency Relationship
• Undisclosed Principal
• Locus Standi
• Pleadings Amendment
• Contractual Liability
• Agency-law

Herbst v Riley (A404/2010)

Herbst v Riley (A404/2010) [2013] ZAGPPHC 229 (26 July 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A404/2010

Judges

E M Makgoba, M M Jansen

The court found that the appellant acted as an agent for an undisclosed principal, Silent Salesman CC, and not in his personal capacity. The respondent was aware of the principal's existence and had already obtained default judgment against the close corporation. According to established legal principles, the liability of an agent and an undisclosed principal is alternative, not joint or cumulative. Once judgment is obtained against one, the claimant is barred from proceeding against the other on the same contract. Therefore, the respondent could not continue the action against the appellant…

Source excerpt

• Agency Law
• Undisclosed Principal
• Joint And Several Liability
• Default Judgment

Slaley Cellars (Pty) Ltd v Tom Edward Wittenberg t/a Confluence Wine Importers (4740/2010)

Slaley Cellars (Pty) Ltd v Tom Edward Wittenberg t/a Confluence Wine Importers (4740/2010) [2012] ZAWCHC 164 (24 August 2012)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

4740/2010

Judge

Olivier, AJ

The High Court held Wittenberg personally liable for wine supplied under the trade name Confluence Wine Importers, because he did not disclose any principal.

• Agency Liability
• Undisclosed Principal
• Sale Of Goods
• Personal Liability Of Agent
• Agency-law
• Undisclosed-principal

Beetle v Phyfer (A77/2010)

Beetle v Phyfer (A77/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 571 (24 November 2010)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A77/2010

Judges

Jamie, E. Moosa

An appeal against summary judgment failed where the appellant could not show that contracting with an undisclosed principal was material, and its counterclaim did not defeat the claim.

• Summary Judgment
• Contract Of Sale
• Undisclosed Principal
• Counterclaim
• Defence In Law
• Summary-judgment

Nkosi v Moatla Investments Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Another (1252/2006)

Nkosi v Moatla Investments Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Another (1252/2006) [2007] ZAGPHC 333 (30 November 2007)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

1252/2006

Judge

T M Makgoka

The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a default judgment, finding the applicant lacked a reasonable explanation for default and a bona fide defence.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Default Judgment
• Good Cause Requirement
• Oral Contract
• Undisclosed Principal
• Rescission-of-judgment