Engagement Case Law (by ST GABA)
In this study unit, you are required to know the following cases:
IMPORTANT CASES
Van Jaarsveld v Bridges
Nhlapo v Zimu
Other cases that must be known (refer to Skelton and Carnelley
textbook, chapter 2)
Cloete v Maritz (CLAIMS based on breach of promise)
Guggenheim v Rosenbaum (DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF
CONTRACT-prospective loss and actual expenses)
Sepheri v Scanlan (unilateral termination of an engagement)
Schnaar v Jansen (misrepresentation rendering engagement
VOIDABLE)
Friedman v Harris (equal fault rule)
Jajbhay v Cassim (equal fault rule-par delictum)
1. Van Jaarsveld v Bridges
Facts
Bride instituted an action against the groom for damages based on:
humiliation caused by breach of promise to marry and monetary
amount from financial loss suffered by plaintiff as consequence of
repudiation of an engagement.
LEGAL QUESTION
Can Mrs Van Jaarsveld claim for delictual and contractual damages
from defendant?
RATIO DECIDENDI
The high court awarded the plaintiff the claim for humiliation
caused by breach of promise and monetary loss suffered by the
plaintiff
SCA disagreed with the award of high court since it was of the
view that courts have a duty to develop common law.
1
Page
1|Page
, SCA held that rejected bride may have a claim for actual expenses
incurred in anticipation of marriage.
SCA held that there was no claim that existed for humiliation caused
by event nor any financial loss.
Plaintiff walked away with nothing and court held that recognition of
common law did not consider the changes in morals and the public
interest
SCA held that the plaintiff can claim for actual expense incurred in
preparation of the wedding.
2. Nhlapo v Zimu
FACTS
Miss Nhlapo instituted claims based on defendant’s alleged
breach of promise namely: Claims for contractual prospective
losses, damages for actio iniurianum and claims for
contractual actual losses.
Legal question
whether the plaintiff is entitled to be compensated for any loss
due to defendant’s breach of promise?
Which of the losses she would be able to recover from
defendant?
Ratio DECIDENCI
FOR PROSPECTIVE LOSSES
SCA referred to Van Jaarsrveld case judgement and held that the claim
for prospective losses is no longer sustainable and should no longer be
allowed by courts. SCA dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for prospective
losses.
FOR ACTUAL LOSSES
SCA held that in order for plaintiff to recover medical fees for invitro
treatment, plaintiff must prove that losses have been within the
agreement of parties and that such losses do not flow from breach of
promise, but from the agreement rising from both parties during an
engagement.
POSITIVE INTERESSE was applied by court and she was awarded
R98149,63. FOR expenses made for common home- court held that such
2
losses have to be compared with defendant’s monetary contribution.
Page
2|Page
In this study unit, you are required to know the following cases:
IMPORTANT CASES
Van Jaarsveld v Bridges
Nhlapo v Zimu
Other cases that must be known (refer to Skelton and Carnelley
textbook, chapter 2)
Cloete v Maritz (CLAIMS based on breach of promise)
Guggenheim v Rosenbaum (DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF
CONTRACT-prospective loss and actual expenses)
Sepheri v Scanlan (unilateral termination of an engagement)
Schnaar v Jansen (misrepresentation rendering engagement
VOIDABLE)
Friedman v Harris (equal fault rule)
Jajbhay v Cassim (equal fault rule-par delictum)
1. Van Jaarsveld v Bridges
Facts
Bride instituted an action against the groom for damages based on:
humiliation caused by breach of promise to marry and monetary
amount from financial loss suffered by plaintiff as consequence of
repudiation of an engagement.
LEGAL QUESTION
Can Mrs Van Jaarsveld claim for delictual and contractual damages
from defendant?
RATIO DECIDENDI
The high court awarded the plaintiff the claim for humiliation
caused by breach of promise and monetary loss suffered by the
plaintiff
SCA disagreed with the award of high court since it was of the
view that courts have a duty to develop common law.
1
Page
1|Page
, SCA held that rejected bride may have a claim for actual expenses
incurred in anticipation of marriage.
SCA held that there was no claim that existed for humiliation caused
by event nor any financial loss.
Plaintiff walked away with nothing and court held that recognition of
common law did not consider the changes in morals and the public
interest
SCA held that the plaintiff can claim for actual expense incurred in
preparation of the wedding.
2. Nhlapo v Zimu
FACTS
Miss Nhlapo instituted claims based on defendant’s alleged
breach of promise namely: Claims for contractual prospective
losses, damages for actio iniurianum and claims for
contractual actual losses.
Legal question
whether the plaintiff is entitled to be compensated for any loss
due to defendant’s breach of promise?
Which of the losses she would be able to recover from
defendant?
Ratio DECIDENCI
FOR PROSPECTIVE LOSSES
SCA referred to Van Jaarsrveld case judgement and held that the claim
for prospective losses is no longer sustainable and should no longer be
allowed by courts. SCA dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for prospective
losses.
FOR ACTUAL LOSSES
SCA held that in order for plaintiff to recover medical fees for invitro
treatment, plaintiff must prove that losses have been within the
agreement of parties and that such losses do not flow from breach of
promise, but from the agreement rising from both parties during an
engagement.
POSITIVE INTERESSE was applied by court and she was awarded
R98149,63. FOR expenses made for common home- court held that such
2
losses have to be compared with defendant’s monetary contribution.
Page
2|Page
