About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
>>
2010
>>
[2010] ZAWCHC 472
|
|
Van Almenkerk vs Standmar Motors (Pty) Ltd (7244/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 472 (13 September 2010)
IN
THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN
CAPE, HIGH COURT, CAPTE TOWN)
CASE
NUMBER: 7244/2010
DATE:
13 SEPTEMBER 2010
In
the matter between:
ABRAHAM
JOHANNES VAN ALMENKERK
….........................................
Applicant
and
STANMAR
MOTORS (PTY)
LIMITED
…...............................................
Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Application
for leave to appeal)
LOUW,
J:
This is an application
for leave to appeal against the judgment and order made by me in
this matter on 10 June 2010 that the applicant's
claim in convention
for the payment of the amount of R200 000, be dismissed.
The question is whether
there is a reasonable prospect that another court may come to a
different conclusion.
In the course of the
judgment I relied on the judgment of the
Appellate
Division in the
Sonap
case
(1992(3) SA 234 (A)). On behalf of the applicant it is submitted
that I misinterpreted the case and, in any event, incorrectly
applied the principles set out in that case to the facts in the
instant case because this is a case where a person is in fact
allowed to rely on its own misrepresentation to ward off a
contractual claim.
Secondly, it is
submitted that my finding that a reasonable person in the position
of the applicant would have appreciated that
there was no contract
to sell the trade-in at the price of at least R500 000, is wrong.
The respondent opposes
the application. However, in my view, this is a case where there is
a reasonable prospect that another
court might come to a different
conclusion on the applicable law and its application to the facts
and leave to appeal should
consequently be granted.
The applicant is granted
leave to appeal to the full bench of this division against the order
made by me and the judgment underlying
that order on the claim in
convention. The costs of the application will be costs in the
appeal.
LOUW,
J