TLI4801
EXAM MAY JUNE
DUE DATE: 26 MAY 2026
,TLI4801 EXAM MAY JUNE 2026
DUE 26 MAY 2026
THE QUESTION PAPER:
QUESTION 1: CIVIL PRACTICE
On 01 August 2025 Zee Man, a businessman and sole owner and director of Zema Plastics
(Pty) Ltd (“Zema Plastics”), a plastic bottle manufacturing business based in Pretoria North,
entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Maneq (Pty) Ltd (“Maneq”), a supplier
and distributor of plant and machinery used for the manufacture of plastic bottles, for the
supply and delivery of 2 heavy duty machines to Zema Plastics for a cash price of R10 000
1.1(a) Advice on the effectiveness of a letter of demand and drafting of the letter
(i) Effectiveness of a letter of demand
A letter of demand is an important pre‑litigation tool, but its effectiveness depends on
the circumstances. In this matter, where Zema Plastics has failed to pay the last
instalment of the purchase price despite previous verbal assurances, a letter of demand
serves this purposes:
It may prompt the debtor to settle the outstanding amount without the need for costly
and time‑consuming litigation. Then completes the cause of action where the contract
does not specify a date for payment here the contract provided for six equal monthly
instalments, so the due date for the last instalment is ascertainable; nevertheless, a
demand puts the debtor in mora and starts the running of interest.¹ Lastly, it constitutes
a necessary step before issuing summons in certain cases, although for a simple debt a
demand is not strictly a prerequisite for instituting action.²
¹ C G Marnewick Litigation Skills for South African Lawyers 5th ed (2024) LexisNexis, Chapter 4; De Kock
v Davidson 1971 (1) SA 428 (T).
² Marnewick (2024) Chapter 4; Joss v Barclays Western Bank Ltd 1990 (1) SA 575 (T).
, However, given that Zema Plastics has already given verbal assurances but failed to
pay, it is unlikely that a mere letter will resolve the matter. The debtor’s behaviour
suggests an unwillingness to pay, and litigation may ultimately be unavoidable.
Nevertheless, sending a formal letter of demand is still advisable because it
demonstrates the creditor’s bona fides, may avoid an adverse costs order if the debtor
would have paid upon demand, and provides a clear record of the demand should the
matter proceed to court.³
³ Marnewick (2024) Chapter 4; Standard Bank of SA Ltd v Hand 2012 (3) SA 319 (GSJ).
EXAM MAY JUNE
DUE DATE: 26 MAY 2026
,TLI4801 EXAM MAY JUNE 2026
DUE 26 MAY 2026
THE QUESTION PAPER:
QUESTION 1: CIVIL PRACTICE
On 01 August 2025 Zee Man, a businessman and sole owner and director of Zema Plastics
(Pty) Ltd (“Zema Plastics”), a plastic bottle manufacturing business based in Pretoria North,
entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Maneq (Pty) Ltd (“Maneq”), a supplier
and distributor of plant and machinery used for the manufacture of plastic bottles, for the
supply and delivery of 2 heavy duty machines to Zema Plastics for a cash price of R10 000
1.1(a) Advice on the effectiveness of a letter of demand and drafting of the letter
(i) Effectiveness of a letter of demand
A letter of demand is an important pre‑litigation tool, but its effectiveness depends on
the circumstances. In this matter, where Zema Plastics has failed to pay the last
instalment of the purchase price despite previous verbal assurances, a letter of demand
serves this purposes:
It may prompt the debtor to settle the outstanding amount without the need for costly
and time‑consuming litigation. Then completes the cause of action where the contract
does not specify a date for payment here the contract provided for six equal monthly
instalments, so the due date for the last instalment is ascertainable; nevertheless, a
demand puts the debtor in mora and starts the running of interest.¹ Lastly, it constitutes
a necessary step before issuing summons in certain cases, although for a simple debt a
demand is not strictly a prerequisite for instituting action.²
¹ C G Marnewick Litigation Skills for South African Lawyers 5th ed (2024) LexisNexis, Chapter 4; De Kock
v Davidson 1971 (1) SA 428 (T).
² Marnewick (2024) Chapter 4; Joss v Barclays Western Bank Ltd 1990 (1) SA 575 (T).
, However, given that Zema Plastics has already given verbal assurances but failed to
pay, it is unlikely that a mere letter will resolve the matter. The debtor’s behaviour
suggests an unwillingness to pay, and litigation may ultimately be unavoidable.
Nevertheless, sending a formal letter of demand is still advisable because it
demonstrates the creditor’s bona fides, may avoid an adverse costs order if the debtor
would have paid upon demand, and provides a clear record of the demand should the
matter proceed to court.³
³ Marnewick (2024) Chapter 4; Standard Bank of SA Ltd v Hand 2012 (3) SA 319 (GSJ).
