PVL3703 Assignment 3
, PVL3703 Assignment 3 (QUIZ) Semester 1 2023
Question 1
Which is the odd one out?
The odd one out is (b) Van Wyk v Lewis 1924 AD 438 as it is a case from the
Appellate Division and the others are cases from the Supreme Court of Appeal or
the Appellate Division of the High Court.
a. _Weber v Santam Versekeringsmaatskappy Bpk_ 1983 1 SA 381 (A).
b. _Van Wyk v Lewis_ 1924 AD 438.
c. _Eskom Holdings Ltd v Hendricks_ 2005 5 SA 503 (SCA).
d. _Roxa v Mtshayi_ 1975 3 SA 761 (A).
Question 2
Zama plays tennis in his back yard. He foresees the possibility of his ball
breaking a window in his neighbour’s house but decides that it will not
happen. If the ball indeed breaks thewindow, Zama had the following form of
fault in respect of the damage:
The correct answer is (c) Dolus indeterminatus. This is a form of fault where the
person foresees the possibility of the harmful consequences of their actions but is
uncertain whether they will occur or not. In this case, Zama foresaw the possibility
of the ball breaking the window but was uncertain whether it would happen or not.
a. Contributory negligence.
b. _Luxuria_.
c. _Dolus indeterminatus_.
d. _Dolus determinatus_.
Question 3
Not yetanswered Marked out of 2 Which one of the following cases is most
frequently cited for its clear formulation of the test for negligence?
The most frequently cited case for its clear formulation of the test for negligence is
(a) Kruger v Coetzee 1966 2 SA 428 (A). This case established the three-part test
, PVL3703 Assignment 3 (QUIZ) Semester 1 2023
Question 1
Which is the odd one out?
The odd one out is (b) Van Wyk v Lewis 1924 AD 438 as it is a case from the
Appellate Division and the others are cases from the Supreme Court of Appeal or
the Appellate Division of the High Court.
a. _Weber v Santam Versekeringsmaatskappy Bpk_ 1983 1 SA 381 (A).
b. _Van Wyk v Lewis_ 1924 AD 438.
c. _Eskom Holdings Ltd v Hendricks_ 2005 5 SA 503 (SCA).
d. _Roxa v Mtshayi_ 1975 3 SA 761 (A).
Question 2
Zama plays tennis in his back yard. He foresees the possibility of his ball
breaking a window in his neighbour’s house but decides that it will not
happen. If the ball indeed breaks thewindow, Zama had the following form of
fault in respect of the damage:
The correct answer is (c) Dolus indeterminatus. This is a form of fault where the
person foresees the possibility of the harmful consequences of their actions but is
uncertain whether they will occur or not. In this case, Zama foresaw the possibility
of the ball breaking the window but was uncertain whether it would happen or not.
a. Contributory negligence.
b. _Luxuria_.
c. _Dolus indeterminatus_.
d. _Dolus determinatus_.
Question 3
Not yetanswered Marked out of 2 Which one of the following cases is most
frequently cited for its clear formulation of the test for negligence?
The most frequently cited case for its clear formulation of the test for negligence is
(a) Kruger v Coetzee 1966 2 SA 428 (A). This case established the three-part test
