CML1501 Assignment 2 Semester
2 2024 (628838)- DUE 19
September 2024
, Question 1
(a) Explain whether the element of fault exists in a “delict” as either intention or
negligence. (5)
(b) Explain the meaning of the term “Damage” in delict. Give examples from case
law.(5)
(c) Explain the meaning of the word “damages” in delict. Give examples from case
law.(5)
Question 1: Delict
(a) Fault in Delict: Intention or Negligence (5 marks)
In delict, the element of fault refers to the blameworthiness of the defendant's conduct.
Fault can manifest as either intention (dolus) or negligence (culpa).
• Intention (Dolus): This is when the defendant acts with the purpose of causing
harm, or when the defendant knows that harm is a certain result of their actions
but proceeds anyway. The intention to harm is central, and the defendant must
have had a clear understanding that their actions would result in damage.
o Example: In Minister of Police v Rabie 1986 (1) SA 117 (A), the court
dealt with the intentional wrongful act of a police officer that led to harm.
The officer was found to have acted intentionally, thereby satisfying the
element of fault.
• Negligence (Culpa): Negligence occurs when the defendant fails to act with the
level of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation,
leading to harm. The defendant’s actions (or omissions) are judged against the
standard of the reasonable person.
o Example: In Kruger v Coetzee 1966 (2) SA 428 (A), the court outlined the
test for negligence, stating that a person is negligent if they foresee the
2 2024 (628838)- DUE 19
September 2024
, Question 1
(a) Explain whether the element of fault exists in a “delict” as either intention or
negligence. (5)
(b) Explain the meaning of the term “Damage” in delict. Give examples from case
law.(5)
(c) Explain the meaning of the word “damages” in delict. Give examples from case
law.(5)
Question 1: Delict
(a) Fault in Delict: Intention or Negligence (5 marks)
In delict, the element of fault refers to the blameworthiness of the defendant's conduct.
Fault can manifest as either intention (dolus) or negligence (culpa).
• Intention (Dolus): This is when the defendant acts with the purpose of causing
harm, or when the defendant knows that harm is a certain result of their actions
but proceeds anyway. The intention to harm is central, and the defendant must
have had a clear understanding that their actions would result in damage.
o Example: In Minister of Police v Rabie 1986 (1) SA 117 (A), the court
dealt with the intentional wrongful act of a police officer that led to harm.
The officer was found to have acted intentionally, thereby satisfying the
element of fault.
• Negligence (Culpa): Negligence occurs when the defendant fails to act with the
level of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation,
leading to harm. The defendant’s actions (or omissions) are judged against the
standard of the reasonable person.
o Example: In Kruger v Coetzee 1966 (2) SA 428 (A), the court outlined the
test for negligence, stating that a person is negligent if they foresee the
