South Africa Case Law

Kempff v Mothuloe (2016-31186)

Kempff v Mothuloe (2016-31186) [2024] ZAGPJHC 312 (27 March 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2016/31186

Judge

Strydom

The court found that the suspensive condition requiring the Master’s approval was inserted solely for the benefit of the curator bonis to avoid personal liability. The Master’s reply established that he was not empowered to approve or sanction the settlement agreement, rendering the suspensive condition inapplicable. Applying the officious bystander test, the court held that the parties would have intended the agreement to become unconditional if the Master lacked authority. Alternatively, the applicant, by filing the Rule 41(4) application, validly waived the suspensive condition before the…

Source excerpt

• Settlement Agreement
• Suspensive Condition
• Waiver Of Condition
• Curator Bonis
• Rule 41 Application

Liberty Group Ltd v Sonitis and Another (2036/2013)

Liberty Group Ltd v Sonitis and Another (2036/2013) [2013] ZAKZDHC 39 (20 August 2013)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

2036/2013

Judge

Gorven

The court refused summary judgment because the applicant’s affidavit relied on mutually destructive versions about suspensive conditions in a lease and suretyship claim.

• Summary Judgment
• Lease Agreement
• Suretyship
• Suspensive Condition
• Waiver Of Condition
• Verification Of Cause Of Action

Africast (Pty) Ltd v Pangbourne Properties Ltd (2010/2117)

Africast (Pty) Ltd v Pangbourne Properties Ltd (2010/2117) [2013] ZAGPJHC 39; [2013] 2 All SA 574 (GSJ) (6 March 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2010/2117

Judge

R Sutherland

The court held that the contract was concluded on signature, the suspensive condition was not met in time, and the plaintiff’s claim failed.

• Contract Interpretation
• Suspensive Condition
• Authority Of Agent
• Estoppel
• Waiver Of Condition
• Contract-interpretation

Park 2000 Development (Pty) Ltd v Page (905/2010)

Park 2000 Development (Pty) Ltd v Page (905/2010) [2011] ZASCA 208 (29 November 2011)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

905/2010

Judges

Brand, Maya, Mhlantla, Malan, Theron

The SCA held that a bond clause was a suspensive condition for the purchaser’s benefit. Because it was not waived or fulfilled in time, the sale lapsed.

• Suspensive Condition
• Agreement Of Sale
• Waiver Of Condition
• Interpretation Of Contract
• Remedies For Breach
• Suspensive-condition