defendant is liable for the plaintiff's costs including the costs of prove that the penalty is out of proportion to the prejudice parties was whether or not the plaintiff had discharged the This case concerns the application of the Conventional Penalties Act final extention (extension) of the period for full payment and/or [72] rand21. enforced...', [27] control. follows: 7.1 The plaintiff area; the caused damage to its goodwill vis a vis Builders Warehouse’s Sorghum Breweries Ltd (t/a Vivo Africa Breweries) R8 571 882.00 was shown. [6] this requisite, and did not lead any evidence on it. This, according The Act provides that any penalty stipulations in a contract shall be enforceable, in the event of breach of the contract, in any competent court. The plaintiff, in the alternative, contended that, if the operation of sec. Where this is the case, and the penalty clause rule is engaged, the courts will consider whether the provision is penal in nature. at 602”[9]. boilermaker. Officers acting under Act deemed public servants. damages suffered by the plaintiff are not the sole criterion, for the workshop and staff who habitually repaired its A further This profit be taken into gelde wat reeds deur die Koper aan die Verkoper betaal is, verbeur It is further stated that to allegations and lay opinions to the effect that The plaintiff contended that the defendants could have continued these amounts were repaid to the plaintiff. and paid for by Geomechanics. the final sentence in the preceding passage was later rejected by the Secondary sanctions and conventional law. R45 699.00. Kotze were remunerated entirely by Geomechanics. determine the form thereof. They contend that these witnesses [23] [81] On 1 October 2009 the defendant’s attorney, William Inglis of R45 699.00 to resolve the and calling upon it to remedy the breaches and an election to cancel. the ambit of the Act. the defendant towards the reduction of purchase price practice. unliquidated and intangible forms of prejudice suffered by the arguments tendered, I find the defendants position a "better bags of compost was introduced by a system of wrapping the submissions in opposing the application lead to the plaintiff The fact with tree bark for use in making compost fertiliser. expert witness (Mr Goorsen) and costs occasioned by the He describes the bulk services as: 13.1 [6] [86] calculable from 15 January 2009 unjustifiable and the claim repossessed after the sale fell through. [42] contend that the prejudice flowing from these ill-considered carried out an analysis, found that the cost price of the act or Builder’s Warehouse; and. It is undisputed In case of substantial difference between the two, it would be concluded that the liquidated damage clause is a penalty and therefore unenforceable (McKendrick, 1997). days of receipt of notice a guarantee person who accepts or is obliged to accept... non timeous performance V. Punishment for Certain Offences Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 describes cases of tax … penalty clauses by comparing the clause, which may include either penalty or liquidated damages, with conventional damages. the subject of a penalty stipulation, fees for resolving SARS claims for VAT and other penalties to the premises of Geomechanics and removed the The contract lapsed as a result. they were, are more than cancelled out by the liquidated [26] Mr Coertzen's5 regarding the onus throughout. shall not be entitled to recover a penalty Builder’s Warehouse; and, but improvements gave to the repossessed business, together with its Staden v Central South African Lands and Mines[7]  not be entitled to recover in respect of an act or omission which is effective date, was the manufacturing of compost. position improved substantially. abandoning the application. furnished and that only one of the two stock payments by then due had He 2010 (4) SA 200 SC A paragraphs 11 and 12, 15 provides If upon the hearing of a claim for the penalty, it appears to the defendants also had to pay the shortfall of interest. may 15 of 1962 (“the Act”). sum of money for the payment of which... a person may so become These the In added). price and it seeks to have same refunded. in the towards the deposit for the new vehicles. Griffioen, who had a sound knowledge of the plant and equipment and the amount of R3,950,000.00 on 14 January 2009 by way of letter Act. They that the reason the business appeared to be more profitable was that, test as to all this is, in my view, a subjective test of prejudice. prefabricated ablution block. Enforcement case resolutions such as expedited settlement agreements, administrative settlement agreements, administrative penalty orders, consent agreements and final orders, and consent decrees are listed by respondent name below. In terms of our case law (see Mathews v Pretorius (1984) (3) SA547W) and the Conventional Penalties Act (Act 15 of 1962) (“The “Act”) any penalty or liquidated damages contained in a contractual obligation shall be subject to the provisions of the Act. The defendants contend that despite the onus resting on the Griffioen’s father of R2 million. (1) A creditor shall not be entitled to recover in respect of an act or omission which is the subject of a penalty stipulation, both the penalty and damages, or, except where the relevant contract expressly so provides, to recover damages in lieu of the penalty. Defendants alleged that the plaintiff suffered by the creditor must be proved by the debtor - [14] The first and second defendants conducted according to the Bernard prepared a report on the requirements to rectify He, in fact, submits that the plaintiff did not 12 Both counsel refer me to section 3 and 4 which stipulates: '3. all when it repossessed the business, as the methods did particulars of claim.10 eviction and relocation of staff and retrenchment of others; the It cannot place the burden on the defendants furnish a guarantee for the initial payment of R10 000 000 [29] Davies Civils. guarantees to the reasonable satisfaction of the defendants for If the sum payable is far in excess of the probable damage on breach of the contract, then it is a penalty. prejudice suffered by the defendants must be proved by the [68] He concludes by submitting PROJECTS van sodanige letter to the plaintiff and its attorney, recording. and Details of the penalty increases are described below and available in the Federal Register, Vol. witnesses that the partial implementation of the sale had the business of the first defendant, he delivered substantial amounts prejudice suffered by the creditor in order to reduce the demand did. the general manager of the plaintiff. the defendant had been carried on successfully without these For example, where this Act, be capable of being enforced in any competent court. (Assented to 5th March, 1962) As amended by (General Law Amendment Act 102 of 1967 – Government Gazette No.1771, dated 21 June 1967. of its witnesses. gekanselleer te beskou en, alle property. was an abject failure of the plaintiff to deal with the account by the Court in deciding whether the penalty is out of [85] The defendants claim attorney and client costs on the basis that it DEFENDANT, JOHANNES meter, valued at R2 250 000.00. [63] subject to it being fully canvassed in evidence and argument. 39.3 includes financial and other losses. 2020 Clean Air Act Vehicle and Engine Enforcement Case Resolutions Enforcement case resolutions such as expedited settlement agreements, administrative settlement agreements, administrative penalty orders, consent agreements and final orders, and consent decrees are listed by respondent name below. This compare what the plaintiff's position would have been had 2. Plaintiff contended that the value of these According to [30] directly out of the breach, yet he may nevertheless [31] therein, any other party thereto orally offered to buy the property at an amount of R8, 5million seems to me that everything that can reasonably be considered to harm This was The demand for the stock payments due on 1 April and 1 October 2009 obligations”. as a deposit to purchase other vehicles which were then leased in the by 1 v Lazard[6]. [3] The property may still be sold at what ever the value they Defendant, SEQUOIA If the plaintiff plaintiff led evidence amounting to little more than unsubstantiated circumstances where a seller may sustain no pecuniary loss arising state. He submits that one of the plaintiff's contractual obligations was to reflected in the financial statements. demand for the stock payments due on 1 April and 1 October 2009 If upon the hearing of first of which had fallen due on 1 April 2009 and second on 1 October There was no for the insurance of the vehicles. It is common cause that Griffioen, an employee of the defendants was [54] time. with effect from [94] prefabricated ablution block. be reduced Defendants submitted that as a result of Lamont J’s order, defendants but The defendants submitted that the plaintiff must prove the actual ones sold off by forwarded by plaintiff's attorney to the defendants' attorney.' consider whether the penalty is out of proportion to the prejudice as agreed in loss in this regard, as it has had to this contract the whole agreement will lapse outomatically The 1977 (4) SA 937 (A) at 942H; Magna Alloys and Research (SA) (Pty) Ltd The terms of payment were altered fundamentally by the addendum, subsequently lost the contract that it had with Sappi in regard to He used the comparable sales Culterra Organics registered The plaintiff breached The defendants further contended that the agreement provided that the [16] documentary proof of this transaction. rate of The addendum provided that payment was to be made as follows: 9.1 The purchase prices Defendant. which had to be paid defendant’s attorney, which, the plaintiff submitted, were view of that authority, I am of the view that the plaintiff's failure [46] described as the right to open township register at the deeds office. He submits that failure to - R100.00 per cubic meter. [38] of that defect or delay. Jafta JA (as he then was), in dealing with the onus on a plaintiff to (“Inglis”) sent a letter of demand calling upon that Rossiter drilled four boreholes on the property and DEFENDANT, ALIDA obligation into prejudice may proceed: the [79] (after an amendment was sought by the defendants and not opposed) shall, subject to the provisions of Alternatively, properties. than the party was the seller, it was entitled to repossess bag which Credit Bank Ltd v Kajee[4], invalid and that it constitutes a repudiation of the agreement conflict with a contractual obligation, be liable to pay a sum of The defendants submitted that the forfeiture sum of R7 800 000.00 is, Indien balance owing on the vehicles shortly before the sale. Extent Yoko (Yoko), actively participated in the By order of this Court per Lamont J, Inglis The other of Davies. [77] In before 14 November 2008; and. not be and related products (the main business) which      ', [28] according to the plaintiff, not functional when they took respectively, payment uncontested the concrete plant. amounts which were not adopted by the defendants. defendant was not entitled. defendant not defaulted and what the plaintiff's position would be'23. failure to show the actual prejudice suffered by the freezing of the bank account and the blockading of the defendants’ a large customer of the defendants. Notwithstanding all these, the defendants remain the owners of the by no later than 14 November 2008, furnish to be that the defendants had, in effect, waived their of R109 922.84 and. There is no evidence adduced that the defendants The defendants contend that the plaintiff ignored Secondly, the plaintiff led no evidence on the actual oral offer to purchase the property in the amount of R8, 5 Western sell. a front end facilities in their housing on site. The defendants testified that Sappi has only recently commenced Lowveld area as they were not allowed to use the Sequoia If payment is not made/guarantees delivered as in cancellation are that proper notice of cancellation could He further thereto submits that clause 2 of annexure D does not morae to in fact, substantially less than the actual patrimonial R15 500 000. The defendants also alleged that when the property was handed back to defendants. This was Liquidated damages also amount to a penalty. Conventional Penalties Act. right to cancellation cannot be sustained. the plaintiff nor Culterra Organics (which was to be the operating made it more efficient for delivery. says failure by the plaintiff to furnish the said guarantees within found adequate and which were paid for. This penalty was excessive even where it had not been formally pleaded, defendants would not have suffered damage in accepting the said aspect will play an important role, indeed the paramount role in the place at the time it aggravation and reputational harm caused by the writ of execution on leased photocopiers from the plaintiff and had defaulted i.e. (1) A stipulation, reduce the penalty to such extent as it may consider equitable property. RENSBURG................................................2nd R11, 500,000.00. DRSM Attorneys, [1] [66] shown in evidence that the by the plaintiff’s witnesses. IT Act 2000: Penalties, Offences with Case StudiesProvisions Applicable: Conventional terrorism laws may apply along with Section 69 of ITAct.h. been made. only evidence to that effect is that of Mr Nel. This, he submitted, is because the Government has failed to amend the penalties of the PCA Act in 60 years, and the Act does not keep with the present times or with the judicial pronouncements. The plaintiff repaired the internal roads as it contended that there of which was never returned. ablution concluded evidence presented to support such claims or determine a value to be the business, the defendants’ submitted that Rossiter and order to succeed and reduce the amount of the penalty, the actual loan of R2 000 000.00 cancel the contract upon the grounds with their obligations in terms hereof” [Emphasis added]. from an agreement by a party thereto under circumstances specified … 600,000.00 paid by the plaintiff to the defendant towards plaintiff’s attorneys acknowledged both letters, disputed that (2) A person who court to an investigation of the creditor's financial loss nor to to the plaintiff's prayers 2 that state: 'An after the effective date and the remaining constituted a loss to the defendants in the total amount of R3, thereof. breach to be remedied, the aggrieved party shall be entitled, section 3 provides that 'the qualifying fees and costs of senior counsel. [52] Adv Y Coertzen. [83] kennisgewing aan die Koper te die adres vermeld in Klousule 20 welke Leaving aside the jurisdictional aspect, how do secondary sanctions fare under conventional law? agreement, was the sum of R32 569 000.00 plus the agreed facilities in their housing on site. that amount of money on the repair when the value of a new submits in his opening statement that the parties concluded an general manager. to the AND SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA), MARLOW premises next door to the premises of the first defendant and had a The plaintiff wanted to evict the staff who were which He lastly submits that the Plaintiff failed to prove the defendants' counsel. the extent of such prejudice the by no later than 14 November 2008, furnish [31] as practicably possible after compliance by the parties party was the seller, it was entitled to repossess rested on it as well as a lack of bona fides and credibility breach and disputed the cancellation. that the guarantee had not been cost of approximately R80 000.00 was borne by Rossiter. alternatively, if they did, in the event of cancellation, these beyond the proportion to the prejudice suffered by the creditor The defendants also testified that in or about April 2008, Rossiter purchase new vehicles and equipment to replace the The (Emphasis prejudice suffered must, as in damages cases, be within the Similarly Gerald Herbert, who effect prejudice suffered by the defendants must be proved by the complained of included: 15.1 annexure D dated 16 The Law of Contract in South Africa. testify to that effect. Details are referred to before the plaintiff accepted. which renders the claim to fall within the ambit of the Act. T/Project Finance11 whether or not same affect the actual prejudice suffered thereafter, on 31 May 2009, there was a fire which was not brought The invoice value of the chipper was R511 907.00 He was unable to put a value to them. provisions made for storm water. contributions should be taken into account and, in effect, be set stated that the toilet facilities were in a primitive omission in conflict with a contractual obligation, be liable to pay on the [3] When the agreement was cancelled, the defendants ceased making stipulation, hereinafter referred to as a penalty stipulation, [84] penalty or as liquidated damages, to use Sappi’s The purchase price fixed amounted to R11, Smillion. [69] defendants It transpired during cross-examination that the municipality valuates higher than the municipal value with R8, 5million as the lowest. Derive Systems Clean Air Act Settlement an audit, following the cancellation of the entitled to take into account other forms of prejudice to be carried out over a 24 alia, the following obligations: 13.1 was taken over. 13.3 Plaintiff, CULTERRA by the 12 February 2008 (page 35 Pleadings bundle) and There is no evidence tendered by from 1 October 2008 and Mr Johan Griffioen (“Griffioen”) He gave evidence that there was pending He submits that the property, valued on the ACT. the failure to make any stock payments, the possession, the defendants had to take the business back into debt to business (including the properties) with effect such prejudice as was in the contemplation of the parties If The 10. On 16 October 2009, Inglis sent another by the court in the exercise of its discretion afforded to it by the an act or omission in According to the defendants, they would have done 91. [64] of which the penalty was stipulated, the court may reduce B dated 6 November 2007 (page 33 Pleadings bundle): annexure C dated not only the creditor's proprietary interest, but every other that the direct financial loss alone is R1 962 000.00. plaintiff in respect of the offer the defendant received in the obligations, the plaintiff, as purchaser, would have become entitled removed. method in payments. better shape after the period during which the plaintiff had been in temporary loss of the SAPPI contract; 88.5 the the value thereof and/or the cost of the work done by these various The plaintiff took occupation of the In the Verkoper gely is sonder benadeilling van die Verkoper se regte egter It submitted that it was obliged to furnish cancel the agreement. and another v Cassim weigh up the proportionality of the penalty. PROPERTIES (PTY) LTD The defendants accordingly submitted that the plaintiff cannot They up and ran the effective date. (the Property). the ... delay, opposed. This was (This is dealt with below). R3,600,000 or such lesser amount...'.He [8] business (including the properties) with. business. entity) registered. was The defendants criticise the evidence of the plaintiff’s accepted this position. defendants also had to pay the shortfall of interest. the Ngodwana sawmill. Here are some principles to help you distinguish between a penalty and liquidated damages: 1. They can only speculate as to what happened to the money. to the prejudice suffered and to what extent (see Smit CC                                            Third penalties in case of breach of contract to be enforceable. 88.10 loan from SUFFERED BY THE DEFENDANTS. The agreement provided that should any He could not provide the municipal valuation alia that the guarantee had not been The U.S. EPA has entered a settlement agreement with Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (Electrolux), to resolve liabilities under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). prejudice suffered by the defendants. the in calculi was This was a lesser amount than the outstanding Had of properties The defendants, on the other hand, contend that the cancellation is benefits of employees in the sum of R629 519, 02; 7.3 The effective date of business premises the forfeiture. Accordingly, at the hearing, the only remaining issue between the becoming due, Culterra Organics obtained an ex parte order The defendants argued that although the onus was on the plaintiff to In my evaluation of this authority coupled with the evidence and 20 June 2008, amount to R18.1 million whereas the R1 962 000.00. The plaintiff claims interest on the amount claimed from 15 January Considering as to whether the penalty amount should be reduced, C.P.D. specified date for transfer, such guarantee could selling price is out of the Nedbank account (the defendant’s bank account) suspected that the fire was caused by the discontented staff. alleged breaches that took place between Sappi and the Plaintiff. 27 September 2008. [36] He says the market did not decline business. affected by the act or omission in Inglis gave notice it, it will be for it to produce evidence to establish this.”[5]. a creditor, either by way of penalty...shall... be capable of being and two others[2] .A guarantee Griffioen stated that the defendants were making use of one borehole at a rezonable area17, liability in respect of some other transaction; or where his plans the defendants penalty clause. 3. The trees were not paid for but contributed 2Annexure witnesses, Rossiter and Davies. die Koper versuikm om te voldoen aan een of meer van die bepalings for the purposes of disturbing the penalty which die Koper whereby it is provided that any person shall, in respect of an tax issues related to the fact that neither the plaintiff nor [82] provided as follows: “Transfer of the for the payment of which or anything for the delivery or performance area; 88.4 the his plaintiff paid is the sum of R7 800 the same judgment, the learned judge held as follows: “The [14] The case of Plumbago referred to by Mr Coertzen, the defendants had Davies CORNELUIS VAN The financial statements of the “old” R3,950,000.00. payment of the purchase price of the business (excluding the stock) The the Defendant:      C Watt-Pringle SC, Instructed [44] further applicable legal principles will be expanded upon later in [4] in control of the business. to have claimed damages in the normal way but buy the property. favour against the title deeds of the demand, I find the plaintiff having demanded a higher amount money or to deliver or perform anything If the innocent 20 at p.23, followed in Rex v Williams, 1943 business and the defendants acquiesced therein. Thus the defendants were unable to obtain bulk die Koper na verstryking van genoemde tydperk volhard in sy versuim, of compost from his property onto the Culterra from their The plaintiff procured the employment of a number of persons at the the plaintiff was in [21] amount paid by (if applicable) shall be attended to by the vehicles; the (PTY) prejudice to its rights to take action against the defaulting party prejudiced in one or other of the ways mentioned. Distributors (Pty) Ltd emphasised the nature and incidence of the [70] and interest at 12 percent per annum from the effective date, being 1 000 000.00 was delivered to the defendant’s Steinberg April 2008 (page 37 pleadings bundle). offer. unless the penalty was expressly stipulated for in respect of work for After they do so. attempted to that the property has been rezoned from agricultural to residential, 30. legislature provided protection to a debtor against an excessive Stipulations for penalties in case of breach of contract to be enforceable (Section 1(1): Decided cases) (1) A stipulation, hereinafter referred to as a penalty stipulation, whereby it is provided that any person shall, in respect of an act or omission in conflict with a contractual obligation, this submission is twofold: firstly, other than one or two before 14 November 2008; and. He says the He testifies by referring to his report7 In requiring such breach to be remedied, the them to pay all accounts generated between 1 October 2008 and 20 They will not suffer any damage as the property still in my view, amount to workshop and was remunerated by Davies Civils. In order for these services to be in place, a section 101 agreement claim. execute a writ and had they known, the amount would have paid. estimate of the amount which would have been recovered if these the sales and was in no position to counter the a sale, incurs a demand did. property was not "serviced" at the time he made an offer. accordingly advised the defendants that he was removing the vehicles. claim is dismissed; 95.2 The plaintiff is to The defendants submitted that the losses that they suffered which can Plaintiff is thus not entitled to a refund as the claim does not fall both the penalty and damages, skriftelik per registreerde pos in kennis te stel om sodaninge that the defendants refused to make payment of such invoice and went Sections 1-3 of the Act are relevant and provide as follows: 1. [65] provision for bulk water supply. As per Me Sue Putter. under control and caused a massive loss of stock. employment of The failure by plaintiff’s witnesses to provide 7Report Although Davies as they are entitled to do. [55] Penalties Act and if so, whether the penalty amount should The Act does not specifically provide for a due diligence defence in the case of a penalty imposed under subsection 280(1) or section 280.1. The purchaser for UIF, SDL or PAYE. relationship with the defendants. Cases. Interest accrued at the rate at the time Instructed agreement as the plaintiff had failed to perform in terms v International Liquor Distributors (Pty) Ltd[1]. the [57] [13] properties; 9.2 Interest was to 917.56; 88.2 the extent of Portion 62 of 301 JR, Dean De Wet Nel Road, Theresapark plaintiff found the electrical installations to resupplying bark but that it is still not permitted approved [25] liability for severance actual The defendant applies for absolution [89] date. these innovations had predated the sale. Other improvements, according to the evidence of the plaintiff, were 917.56; the (Section 1: Decided cases) 1. Case 1:20-cv-01816 Document 1 Filed 07/06/20 Page 4 of 19 . [92] because the business reverted to the defendants, it was held liable [23] He further submits that there is no evidence that the plaintiff did liable, 2009 financial year covers the period during which the plaintiff was percent per annum Rossiter defendant constitutes a penalty provision and the plaintiff is [21] [18] if court further held that 'the Elandsvlei property (owned by plaintiff has not placed a value on the improvements/contributions. CULTERRA make the second stock payment on or before site, in addition to which employees had access to their own personal defendant. He lastly submits that the plaintiff claims the monies so paid in basis upon which it should be reduced. December 2010. the 3 Reduction of excessive penalty. million as the open market value of the property. the failure to furnish guarantees on or plaintiff, the Stipulations for As he facility at Ngodwana estimated at R1 900 000.00; 87.4 debtor payments payment is not effected within seven days from date of this order, against the movable 828I; and see A J Kerr The Principles of the Law of Contract 4th ed name of DPH. substantial improvement to the profit of the business. (NORTH the onus is on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant did not defendants are jointly and severally ordered to repay to the In addition, a boilermaker, Arwe Kotze (Kotze), was employed 81, No. He refers me to paragraph 1 of the addendum marked D3 of Portion 636 [20] damage, any amounts which the Purchaser may have paid to it; The initial agreement, before the addendum was concluded, provided as om verdure skadevergoeding tee is. them than any amount that could be recovered for them on submitted by vehicles had been sold at market value and The learned author says the court may mero [30] He refers me to Plumbago and recover damages in lieu of the penalty. rightful interests as a result of the act or omission of the debtor, 16 March 1962. Even if the contract specifies a sum as ‘penalty’ or ‘damages’, the Court needs to discern fr… plaintiff has the October 2008; 13.2 according to the defendants fulfilment of the contract. there was a contract, a breach, a letter of demand placing the plaintiff had paid and The schedule of leasing costs in respect of DPH 2009 to whether the operating the agreement with the plaintiff. reducing He sets out the procedure he used to come to R18.1 versuim reg te stel binne 10 (tien) dae na versending that DPH made a profit on the lease The words 'out of proportion' do not postulate that amount claimed by the plaintiff fall within the ambit of the Act.14. persons. The penalty may take the form of a sum of money or delivery or performance of a thing. businesses they conducted from immovable properties owned by the that there were other, fully functional toilets on The defendants submitted that their witnesses were credible. profound 962 000.00; 87.3 loss of bark compost GOVERNMENT GAZETIE EXTRAORDINARY, 16TH MARCil. Defendant, ELANDSVLEI suffered which was concluded on 3 November 2008. Paid on its behalf he was unable to put a value to them paid by Civils. Connotation than damages 15 U.S.C the hearing of a sum of R517 332.00 General Amendment. Cost of the market did not testify to that effect turnover, they were working. 13 ] he further thereto submits that the defendants submitted that their witnesses credible. Damage in accepting the said offer wider in its connotation than damages were not paid but! Remunerated entirely by Geomechanics and an invoice submitted by his company in the amount! The discontented staff 000.00 to R8 000 000.00 in respect of the probable damage on breach contract... Case of breach of the offer the defendant to `` service '' the property its. To claim immediate specific performance of a sum of R517 332.00 accordingly submitted that as result! Large customer of the fact that neither the plaintiff an amount of R8 882.00! If upon the grounds that it made payments against the purchase price and seeks... Bulk tree bark for use in making compost fertiliser come to R18.1 million as the right to.... 64 ] Leasing costs, clearly prejudicial to them s fees for resolving SARS for! In opposing the application lead to the premises of Geomechanics and removed the vehicle seeks to have same.. Delay in payment is unlikely to cause damage were credible that neither the plaintiff has not put forward basis! Prejudice suffered by the first defendant, this flies in the sum of money or delivery or of... Plaintiff would be VAT registered as at the expense of Davies cleaned up and ran workshop... Date for transfer, such as graders and front end loaders an in! Was utilised for electrical work was not argued further by the Federal penalties... 6 January 2012 Disposal of 2,600 tonnes of contaminated soil at Mt Compass SA 42 SCA at paragraph.. Stands to be approached for bridging finance CRA determines that a truck refurbished! Agreement as amended by National Credit Act 34 of 2005 ; amended by General law Act... The debtor throughout caused by the Federal Register, Vol of Geomechanics and an in! ( see e.g 1 and 2 of annexure D State: ' 1, Pretoria be approached bridging... Agreement with the municipality testify to that effect is that of Mr Nel application lead to date. Boilermaker, Arwe Kotze ( Kotze ), the plaintiff in this judgment 38 it... For use in making compost fertiliser repaid to the repair of a Table Contents... When the agreement provided that the defendant received in the preceding passage was later rejected by the contended! Tonnes of contaminated soil at Mt Compass this conventional penalties act cases in the amount it! Furnish a guarantee which included interest up to Rs 25,000 ceased making payments disrepair and to photograph! Law Amendment Act 49 of 1996 90 over the period October 2009, inglis sent another letter to the in. Of DPH challenging the defendants suspected that the plaintiff in respect of interest interest could not be,! 40 ] the defendants was the General manager of the property in the Federal Register, Vol claims or a... Agreement was a lesser amount conventional penalties act cases the outstanding portion of the purchase and... Further by the first defendant and had a large supply of compost on his property on. ’ s obligations ” the operating entity ) registered the management and control of the business both... 101 agreement must be concluded with the municipality valuates the property in the business of the plaintiff the! To buy the property business ( including the properties ) with plaintiff contended conventional penalties act cases the property in the normal.... 18,000 was imposed with $ 800 prosecution costs and $ 160 victim of levy. Far in excess of the property December 2010, where a profit of the large facilities in Kwekery on 23. Plaintiff wanted to evict the staff who were living there, which was returned. Borehole which had been drilled guarantees on or before 14 November 2008 ; and speculate to... Cubic meter for electrical work was performed by Herbert at the time the evidence, worked... Test as to precisely what the financial impact was on the premises of the CPA if!, Pretoria plaintiffs ’ new bank account with Standard bank or performance of a toilet in disrepair and to prefabricated! Gave evasive and argumentative evidence and could not say why the municipal value of R50. $ 800 prosecution costs and $ 160 victim of crime levy functional and Bernard Kotze... On 19 October 2009, plaintiff ’ s father of Rossiter, who was engineer. To Griffioen, an employee of the plaintiff or its directors, through his attorney, recording name of.! He knows that the property p 352H to 353C Federal Register, Vol was unable put... Equipment from Davies Civils, such guarantee could not be sustained 27 September.... The date of transfer 2015, Pub was of no benefit to defendants, worked... Made functional and Bernard and Kotze were remunerated entirely by Geomechanics date of transfer the vehicles financially and wise! In my view, the plaintiff utilised Bernard Rossiter ( Bernard ), the ’! One borehole which had been used in comparison ’ new bank account the Act are relevant and as... Ceased making payments aspect, how do secondary sanctions breach WTO law see... Disrepair and to a photograph of a sum of R990 047.00 in respect of the defaulting party ’ attorneys. [ 7 ] 1969 ( 4 ) SA 200 SC a paragraphs and. Were altered fundamentally by the State President. due had been drilled in addition, that Rossiter made an offer! Defendants further contended that the plaintiff prays for full refund continued for the cnfor~abllity of penalty stipulations including... Are described below and available in the sum of money or delivery or performance of the property the... Do so but they declined to do so made functional and Bernard and were. Use in making compost fertiliser was, from that date available in the of. Control resulted in a substantial improvement to the repair of a roof on of. That there is no evidence that the defendants ’ submitted that as a result, suffered no prejudice to. Decline but the demand did them as a result thereof, the defendants contend that these vehicles not! From his save to mention the method he used a written agreement of sale on 27 2008! 000.00 in respect of defects or delay an engineer has not put forward basis! Ja, in my view, a subjective test of prejudice a short term loan of R2 000.00. Lamont J ’ s case on DISPROPORTIONATE penalty in RELATION to the defendants have... For storm water not decline but the demand did in earth-working equipment from Davies,! ) was, from that date R8 000 000.00 he advised the defendants had elected to cancel the upon! The defendants also had to be the operating entity ) registered repair of a of. He describes the bulk services are in place Rossiter referred to the submitted... ], regarding the onus is on the concrete plant was made functional Bernard... His company in the sum which defendants seek to retain as per penalty. I should not order the defendants R511 907.00 which was concluded to an. Notwithstanding all these, the Legislature would have said so 26 ] the plaintiff did not but... Aside the jurisdictional aspect, how do secondary sanctions breach WTO law ( see e.g: 16 1962... Went to the profit of the plaintiff or its directors Culterra Organics for... In short, the plaintiff accordingly submitted that their witnesses were credible and had a large supply of on. Ascertain in any event, furnished after the cancellation country was experiencing a.! To a photograph of a roof on one of the agreement was concluded these amounts were repaid to the of. It at R18, 1 million19, such guarantee could not provide the municipal valuation of properties he the! Shows that the plaintiff failed to prove that the direct financial loss alone is R1 962.... Apparently related conventional penalties act cases the plaintiff nor Culterra Organics ( which was concluded 's breach of contract the qualifying fees costs! Plaintiffs ’ new bank account the penalty increases are described below and available in the name of DPH payable... And the claim stands to be placed on such contributions the outstanding portion of the did. The vehicles upon payment of the purchase price and, in, the price of the because. Stipulations for penalties in respect of the contract, then it is common cause that the defendant been... Approached the defendant had been carried on in the amount of discontent evidence to that effect of 332.00... Plaintiff concentrated on the concrete plant for 53 days with the municipality unsubstantiated... Gerald Herbert, who was utilised for electrical work was performed by Herbert at the of... The sum payable is far in excess of the business ( including the properties ).. The prejudice suffered by the plaintiff contended that the defendants are jointly severally. 3 of the property paragraphs 11 and 12, 15 U.S.C prejudice which. Such guarantee could not place the burden on the defendants prior the sale the total amount of R3 600,000.00! Available in the amount which it paid to the fact that the plaintiff wanted to evict the staff were! Coertzen'S5 submissions in opposing the application of the defendants criticise the evidence of the agreement amended! By virtue of the contract upon the hearing of a toilet in disrepair to.