IRM1501
ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 2 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 19 SEPTEMBER 2025
, Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd v Fouché ([2020] ZASCA 8; 2021 (1)
SA 371 (SCA)), delivered on 18 March 2020.
1. Facts
Mr Nickolaus Fouché gave Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd a written
mandate to manage his investment funds, specifying that all instructions must be sent
via fax or email with his signature. In August 2016, fraudsters hacked Mr Fouché’s
email account and sent three fraudulent emails instructing Global to transfer a total of
R804,000 to various third-party bank accounts. The emails ended with “Nick” but did not
contain a proper signature. Global processed and transferred the funds. Mr Fouché later
discovered the fraud and claimed that the instructions were unauthorized and that
Global had breached the mandate.
2. Legal Question
Did Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd breach the mandate by acting on
fraudulent emails that lacked the required signature, and does a typed name at the end
of an email qualify as a valid electronic signature under section 13(3) of the Electronic
Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECT Act)?
3. Reasons for the Decision
The court interpreted the mandate to require a formal signature, not merely an
email or typed name.
There was no agreement between the parties to use electronic signatures as
allowed under section 13(3) of the ECT Act.
ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 2 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 19 SEPTEMBER 2025
, Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd v Fouché ([2020] ZASCA 8; 2021 (1)
SA 371 (SCA)), delivered on 18 March 2020.
1. Facts
Mr Nickolaus Fouché gave Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd a written
mandate to manage his investment funds, specifying that all instructions must be sent
via fax or email with his signature. In August 2016, fraudsters hacked Mr Fouché’s
email account and sent three fraudulent emails instructing Global to transfer a total of
R804,000 to various third-party bank accounts. The emails ended with “Nick” but did not
contain a proper signature. Global processed and transferred the funds. Mr Fouché later
discovered the fraud and claimed that the instructions were unauthorized and that
Global had breached the mandate.
2. Legal Question
Did Global & Local Investments Advisors (Pty) Ltd breach the mandate by acting on
fraudulent emails that lacked the required signature, and does a typed name at the end
of an email qualify as a valid electronic signature under section 13(3) of the Electronic
Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECT Act)?
3. Reasons for the Decision
The court interpreted the mandate to require a formal signature, not merely an
email or typed name.
There was no agreement between the parties to use electronic signatures as
allowed under section 13(3) of the ECT Act.
