P
, VL3703 Assignment 1 Semester 1 2026
Discussion: Whether the Element of Conduct Is Satisfied in
Amir’s Delictual Claim Against Lalita
Introduction
In South African law, delictual liability arises when a person
suffers harm as a result of another person’s behavior that is
wrongful, negligent or intentional, and causally linked to the harm.
One of the essential elements for establishing delict is conduct,
which refers to human behavior in the form of a positive act or an
omission. The purpose of the conduct element is to determine
whether the defendant’s behavior can be legally attributed to the
harm suffered by the plaintiff. In the scenario between Lalita and
Amir, Lalita noticed a loose, sparking plug in the communal
kitchen but left without warning Amir, who later suffered injury and
property damage. This discussion examines whether Lalita’s
behavior satisfies the element of conduct in Amir’s potential
delictual claim.
Conduct as a Positive Act or Omission
The element of conduct can arise from either doing something
harmful or failing to act when a legal duty exists. Lalita did not
actively cause the fire; she did not touch the kettle or interfere
with the plug. Her conduct, therefore, falls under the category of
an omission, because she failed to take reasonable steps to
prevent a foreseeable risk. Omissions are actionable only when
there is a legal duty to act, and in this case, Lalita had knowledge
of the hazard and the potential risk to others entering the kitchen.
By leaving without warning Amir or taking preventive measures,
, VL3703 Assignment 1 Semester 1 2026
Discussion: Whether the Element of Conduct Is Satisfied in
Amir’s Delictual Claim Against Lalita
Introduction
In South African law, delictual liability arises when a person
suffers harm as a result of another person’s behavior that is
wrongful, negligent or intentional, and causally linked to the harm.
One of the essential elements for establishing delict is conduct,
which refers to human behavior in the form of a positive act or an
omission. The purpose of the conduct element is to determine
whether the defendant’s behavior can be legally attributed to the
harm suffered by the plaintiff. In the scenario between Lalita and
Amir, Lalita noticed a loose, sparking plug in the communal
kitchen but left without warning Amir, who later suffered injury and
property damage. This discussion examines whether Lalita’s
behavior satisfies the element of conduct in Amir’s potential
delictual claim.
Conduct as a Positive Act or Omission
The element of conduct can arise from either doing something
harmful or failing to act when a legal duty exists. Lalita did not
actively cause the fire; she did not touch the kettle or interfere
with the plug. Her conduct, therefore, falls under the category of
an omission, because she failed to take reasonable steps to
prevent a foreseeable risk. Omissions are actionable only when
there is a legal duty to act, and in this case, Lalita had knowledge
of the hazard and the potential risk to others entering the kitchen.
By leaving without warning Amir or taking preventive measures,
