, PVL3704 Assignment 1 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester
2 2026 - DUE 17 August 2026; 100% Correct solutions and
explanations.
Question 1
Discuss (by reference to relevant case law) the requirement that the
enrichment must have been sine causa.
Introduction
The law of unjustified enrichment is an important branch of South African
private law. It is founded on the principle that no person should be allowed to
benefit unfairly at the expense of another where there is no legal justification
for retaining that benefit. However, a claim based on unjustified enrichment
will only succeed if the plaintiff proves all the recognised requirements for
such a claim. One of the most important requirements is that the enrichment
must have been sine causa, meaning that it must have occurred without a
lawful or recognised legal cause. This requirement ensures that enrichment
claims are limited to cases where it would be unfair and legally unjustifiable
for the defendant to retain the benefit received (Sonnekus & Neels, 2019).
The courts have repeatedly confirmed that enrichment alone is not enough to
establish liability. The plaintiff must also demonstrate that there was no legal
basis, such as a contract, legislation, a court order or a valid donation, that
entitled the defendant to retain the benefit. If such a legal basis exists, the
enrichment is regarded as justified and no enrichment action can succeed
(Hutchison & Pretorius, 2017).
Meaning of Sine Causa
The expression sine causa is a Latin phrase meaning "without legal cause"
or "without lawful justification." In the context of unjustified enrichment, a
legal cause (causa) refers to a recognised legal reason that justifies the
transfer of money, property or another benefit from one person to another.
A legal cause may arise from:
2 2026 - DUE 17 August 2026; 100% Correct solutions and
explanations.
Question 1
Discuss (by reference to relevant case law) the requirement that the
enrichment must have been sine causa.
Introduction
The law of unjustified enrichment is an important branch of South African
private law. It is founded on the principle that no person should be allowed to
benefit unfairly at the expense of another where there is no legal justification
for retaining that benefit. However, a claim based on unjustified enrichment
will only succeed if the plaintiff proves all the recognised requirements for
such a claim. One of the most important requirements is that the enrichment
must have been sine causa, meaning that it must have occurred without a
lawful or recognised legal cause. This requirement ensures that enrichment
claims are limited to cases where it would be unfair and legally unjustifiable
for the defendant to retain the benefit received (Sonnekus & Neels, 2019).
The courts have repeatedly confirmed that enrichment alone is not enough to
establish liability. The plaintiff must also demonstrate that there was no legal
basis, such as a contract, legislation, a court order or a valid donation, that
entitled the defendant to retain the benefit. If such a legal basis exists, the
enrichment is regarded as justified and no enrichment action can succeed
(Hutchison & Pretorius, 2017).
Meaning of Sine Causa
The expression sine causa is a Latin phrase meaning "without legal cause"
or "without lawful justification." In the context of unjustified enrichment, a
legal cause (causa) refers to a recognised legal reason that justifies the
transfer of money, property or another benefit from one person to another.
A legal cause may arise from:
