Peters, Flamman and Company v Kokstad Municipality

Last updated

Peters, Flamman and Company v Kokstad Municipality, [1] decided by Solomon JA, is an important case in South African contract law, specifically in the area of termination and supervening impossibility of performance.

The company had entered into a twenty-year contract with the municipality to light its street lamps. [2] It managed this without trouble for more than ten years, at which point World War I broke out. The company was run and staffed by Germans, who were designated enemies of state and interned forthwith in prisoner-of-war camps. The company was handed over to and wound up by the state.

The company was clearly unable any longer to carry out its contractual obligations, so Kokstad Municipality sued for breach of contract. Solomon determined that, owing the supervening circumstances, performance was objectively impossible (casus fortuitus), and that the contract should therefore be terminated. The company's failure to perform was excused, "as no-one in those circumstances would be able to perform the contract and the impossibility is not due to his or her [that is, the company's] fault." [3]

Related Research Articles

<i>Force majeure</i> Extraordinary occurrence beyond control

Force majeure is a common clause in contracts which essentially frees both parties from liability or obligation when an extraordinary event or circumstance beyond the control of the parties, such as a war, strike, riot, crime, epidemic or sudden legal changes prevents one or both parties from fulfilling their obligations under the contract. Explicitly excluded is any event described as an act of God, which covers a separate domain and legally differs, yet it is still related to contract law. In practice, most force majeure clauses do not excuse a party's non-performance entirely but only suspend it for the duration of the force majeure.

<i>Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris (International) Ltd</i> English contract law case

Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris (International) Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1407 is a case on English contract law and on maritime salvage. It investigates when a common mistake within a contractual agreement will render it void.

South African contract law

South African contract law is "essentially a modernized version of the Roman-Dutch law of contract", which is itself rooted in canon and Roman laws. In the broadest definition, a contract is an agreement two or more parties enter into with the serious intention of creating a legal obligation. Contract law provides a legal framework within which persons can transact business and exchange resources, secure in the knowledge that the law will uphold their agreements and, if necessary, enforce them. The law of contract underpins private enterprise in South Africa and regulates it in the interest of fair dealing.

Holmdene Brickworks (Pty) Ltd v Roberts Construction Co Ltd, decided by Corbett CJ, is an important case in South African contract law, specifically in the area of breach.

World Leisure Holidays (Pty) Ltd v Georges is an important case in South African contract law, specifically in the area of termination. It was heard in the Witwatersrand Local Division by Cloete J, Blieden J and Malan J on 14 February, 2002, with judgment handed down on 26 February. An appeal from a decision in a magistrate's court, it is the leading case on the issue of temporary supervening impossibility of performance.

Joubert v Enslin is an important case in South African contract law, heard in the Cape Town Appellate Division on July 8, 9, and 22, 1910.

Hansen, Schrader & Co. v De Gasperi is an important case in South African contract law. It was heard by Solomon J in the Witwatersrand High Court from April 15 to 16, 1903.

Johnston v Leal is an important case in South African contract law, heard in the Appellate Division on 22 February 1980, by Jansen JA, Corbett JA, Miller JA, Van Winsen AJA and Botha AJA, with judgment handed down on 30 May. The case is valuable, inter alia, for its exposition of the parol evidence rule.

Delmas Milling Co Ltd. v Du Plessis is an important case in South African contract law. It was heard in the Appellate Division by Centlivres CJ, Schreiner JA, Van Den Heever JA, Hoexter JA and Fagan JA on June 13, 1955, with judgment handed down on June 20. It was an appeal from a decision in the Transvaal Provincial Division, which it upheld.

BK Tooling (Edms) Bpk v Scope Precision Engineering (Edms) Bpk, an important case in South African contract law, was heard and decided in the Appellate Division on 16 September 1977 and 15 September 1978 respectively. The case dealt with remedies for the breach of a reciprocal contract in cases where the creditor has been prevented from performing fully his obligations by the failure of the other party's necessary co-operation. The court held that the creditor may in such circumstances claim performance, but that his claim will be subject to a reduction by the costs he saves in not having fully to make his counterperformance.

Golden Cape Fruits (Pty) Ltd v Fotoplate (Pty) Ltd is an important case in South African contract law, heard in the Cape Provincial Division by Diemont J and Corbett J on 13 February 1973, with judgment handed down on 8 March.

Coutts v Jacobs is an important case in South African contract law, with especial resonance for trade usage in the area of implied terms.

MacDuff & Co Ltd v Johannesburg Consolidated Investment Co Ltd is the leading case in South African contract law on the issue of fictional fulfilment of suspensive conditions.

Wells v SA Alumenite Co. is an important case in South African contract law, heard in the Appellate Division in Bloemfontein, on 6 October 1926, with judgment delivered on 11 October. Innes CJ, De Villiers JA, Kotzé JA, Wessels JA and Stratford AJA were the judges.

Barkhuizen v Napier is an important case in South African contract law, decided by the Constitutional Court on 4 April 2007, having been heard on 4 May 2006. The judges were Langa CJ, Moseneke DCJ, Madala J, Mokgoro J, Ngcobo J, Nkabinde J, O'Regan J, Sachs J, Skweyiya J, Van Der Westhuizen J and Yacoob J.

Weinberg v Olivier is an important case in South African contract law, especially in the area of exemption clauses. It was heard in the Appellate Division on 20 October 1942, with judgment handed down on 26 November. De Wet CJ, Watermeyer JA, Tindall JA, Centlivres JA and Feetham JA were the judges.

Swadif (Pty) Ltd v Dyke NO is an important case in South African contract law, especially in the area of novation. It was heard in the Appellate Division by Wessels JA, Muller JA, Miller JA, Joubert JA and Trengove AJA on 15 September 1977, with judgment handed down on 22 November.

Santos Professional Football Club (Pty) Ltd v Igesund and Another is an important case in South African contract law. It was heard in the Cape Provincial Division by Foxcroft J, Moosa J and Selikowitz J on 20 September 2002, with judgment delivered on 27 September. Counsel was the appellant was NM Arendse SC ; for the first respondent appeared SP Rosenberg and for the second MA Albertus SC.

Benson v SA Mutual Life Assurance Society is an important case in South African contract law, particularly in the area of claims for specific performance. It was heard in the Appellate Division, by Corbett JA, Kotzé JA, Hefer JA, Galgut AJA and Cillié AJA, on 7 November 1985, with judgment handed down on 29 November.

Strachan v Prinsloo is an important case in South African contract law. It was heard in the Transvaal Provincial Division by Tindall J and Greenberg J.

References

Notes

  1. ↑ 1919 AD 427.
  2. ↑ This was, in those days, a manual task.
  3. ↑ Du Plessis et al 382.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.