PVL3701 –Assignment 01 Semester 2 Solutions
Due date:
FOR EXAMS, PORTFOLIO, AND ASSIGNMENT
ASSISTANCE WHATSAPP
083 286 8465 EMAIL:
Disclaimer: This document is provided for educational purposes only and represents the
original work of the author, intended solely for learning, research, and reference. No part of
this material has been generated using AI tools, and all sources, where applicable, have been
properly acknowledged to ensure zero plagiarism. By using or submitting this document, you
agree to use it only as a guide for academic purposes, accept full responsibility for any
academic or legal consequences arising from plagiarism, misuse, or institutional violations, and
comply with your institution’s code of conduct and academic regulations. Unauthorized
copying, distribution, resale, or commercial use of this material is strictly prohibited.
, Question 1
The primary issue is whether Evergreen Printing can successfully vindicate the
lithographic printing machine and compressor from USS Graphics, which continues
to possess and use these machines after the lease agreement expired. What must
Evergreen Printing prove to succeed in vindication?
The rei vindicatio is the classical and fundamental remedy for an owner to reclaim
possession of a thing from an unlawful possessor. It is based on the real right of
ownership and protects ownership by enabling the owner to reclaim their property
from whoever holds it without lawful justification. To succeed with rei vindicatio, the
plaintiff must prove three key elements: (1) that they are the owner of the property in
question, (2) that the property exists and is identifiable, and (3) that the defendant is
in possession of the property without lawful right (PVL3701 Study Guide, Study Unit
6; USS Graphics case).Ownership is the most complete real right in property law,
granting the owner rights of control, use, enjoyment, alienation, and vindication of the
thing. The rei vindicatio protects these rights against unlawful interference by third
parties.
In this case, Evergreen Printing, owned by Mr Mboweni, owns the lithographic
printing machine and the compressor, both movable things. Despite being attached
to the floor and walls of the garage where USS Graphics operates, the machines
remain identifiable movable property unless they have legally acceded to the
immovable property. USS Graphics is in unlawful possession as the lease
agreement has expired, and the defendant continues to use the equipment without
paying rent or lawful authorization.
The attachment to the immovable property does not automatically change the nature
of the things into immovables, especially since the machines are heavy equipment
typically movable and leased on a contractual basis. The defendant's refusal to
return the equipment after the lease's expiry is an unlawful act justifying vindication.
Thus, Evergreen Printing must establish ownership of the machines, their continued
existence and identifiability, and prove USS Graphics is in unlawful possession. The
facts satisfy these requirements, enabling vindication.
Due date:
FOR EXAMS, PORTFOLIO, AND ASSIGNMENT
ASSISTANCE WHATSAPP
083 286 8465 EMAIL:
Disclaimer: This document is provided for educational purposes only and represents the
original work of the author, intended solely for learning, research, and reference. No part of
this material has been generated using AI tools, and all sources, where applicable, have been
properly acknowledged to ensure zero plagiarism. By using or submitting this document, you
agree to use it only as a guide for academic purposes, accept full responsibility for any
academic or legal consequences arising from plagiarism, misuse, or institutional violations, and
comply with your institution’s code of conduct and academic regulations. Unauthorized
copying, distribution, resale, or commercial use of this material is strictly prohibited.
, Question 1
The primary issue is whether Evergreen Printing can successfully vindicate the
lithographic printing machine and compressor from USS Graphics, which continues
to possess and use these machines after the lease agreement expired. What must
Evergreen Printing prove to succeed in vindication?
The rei vindicatio is the classical and fundamental remedy for an owner to reclaim
possession of a thing from an unlawful possessor. It is based on the real right of
ownership and protects ownership by enabling the owner to reclaim their property
from whoever holds it without lawful justification. To succeed with rei vindicatio, the
plaintiff must prove three key elements: (1) that they are the owner of the property in
question, (2) that the property exists and is identifiable, and (3) that the defendant is
in possession of the property without lawful right (PVL3701 Study Guide, Study Unit
6; USS Graphics case).Ownership is the most complete real right in property law,
granting the owner rights of control, use, enjoyment, alienation, and vindication of the
thing. The rei vindicatio protects these rights against unlawful interference by third
parties.
In this case, Evergreen Printing, owned by Mr Mboweni, owns the lithographic
printing machine and the compressor, both movable things. Despite being attached
to the floor and walls of the garage where USS Graphics operates, the machines
remain identifiable movable property unless they have legally acceded to the
immovable property. USS Graphics is in unlawful possession as the lease
agreement has expired, and the defendant continues to use the equipment without
paying rent or lawful authorization.
The attachment to the immovable property does not automatically change the nature
of the things into immovables, especially since the machines are heavy equipment
typically movable and leased on a contractual basis. The defendant's refusal to
return the equipment after the lease's expiry is an unlawful act justifying vindication.
Thus, Evergreen Printing must establish ownership of the machines, their continued
existence and identifiability, and prove USS Graphics is in unlawful possession. The
facts satisfy these requirements, enabling vindication.
