PVL3703
Assignment 1 Semester 2 2026
Unique number:
Due date: 1 September 2026
2 DIFFERENT ANSWERS PROVIDED
Whether Ricky’s Behaviour Constitutes Conduct for the Purposes of Delict
1. Introduction
Conduct is the first general requirement for delictual liability. It may be defined as a
voluntary human act or omission.1 Conduct must be distinguished from the
remaining elements of a delict, namely wrongfulness, fault, causation and damage.
The presence of conduct does not by itself establish that Ricky is liable. It merely
confirms that his behaviour may be examined under the remaining delictual
requirements.1
The issue is whether Ricky’s failure to secure the scaffolding before leaving the
construction site qualifies as legally recognised conduct. His three arguments
, 2 DIFFERENT ANSWERS PROVIDED
Whether Ricky’s Behaviour Constitutes Conduct for the Purposes of Delict
1. Introduction
Conduct is the first general requirement for delictual liability. It may be defined as a
voluntary human act or omission.1 Conduct must be distinguished from the
remaining elements of a delict, namely wrongfulness, fault, causation and damage.
The presence of conduct does not by itself establish that Ricky is liable. It merely
confirms that his behaviour may be examined under the remaining delictual
requirements.2
The issue is whether Ricky’s failure to secure the scaffolding before leaving the
construction site qualifies as legally recognised conduct. His three arguments
concern the wind, the shift supervisor’s responsibility and the legal status of an
omission.
2. Requirements for Legally Recognised Conduct
For delictual purposes, conduct must involve human behaviour. A person may act
through a positive act, known as a commissio, or through a failure to act, known as
an omissio.3 Therefore, Ricky’s argument that an omission cannot constitute conduct
is legally incorrect. A person’s failure to perform an act can satisfy the conduct
requirement where the person was physically capable of acting but did not do so.4
The conduct must also be voluntary, meaning that it must be susceptible to the
control of the person’s will.5 Voluntariness does not require proof that the person
desired the result. It is sufficient that the person possessed the mental and physical
ability to control the relevant bodily movements.6 For example, a failure to warn
others about danger may be voluntary even though the person did not intend anyone
1
J Neethling and JM Potgieter, Law of Delict (8th edn, LexisNexis 2020) 27.
2
University of South Africa, Law of Delict Study Guide PVL3703 (Unisa 2016) 15–16.
3
Neethling and Potgieter (n 1) 27–32.
4
ibid 28–32.
5
ibid 27–28.
6
ibid 28.
Assignment 1 Semester 2 2026
Unique number:
Due date: 1 September 2026
2 DIFFERENT ANSWERS PROVIDED
Whether Ricky’s Behaviour Constitutes Conduct for the Purposes of Delict
1. Introduction
Conduct is the first general requirement for delictual liability. It may be defined as a
voluntary human act or omission.1 Conduct must be distinguished from the
remaining elements of a delict, namely wrongfulness, fault, causation and damage.
The presence of conduct does not by itself establish that Ricky is liable. It merely
confirms that his behaviour may be examined under the remaining delictual
requirements.1
The issue is whether Ricky’s failure to secure the scaffolding before leaving the
construction site qualifies as legally recognised conduct. His three arguments
, 2 DIFFERENT ANSWERS PROVIDED
Whether Ricky’s Behaviour Constitutes Conduct for the Purposes of Delict
1. Introduction
Conduct is the first general requirement for delictual liability. It may be defined as a
voluntary human act or omission.1 Conduct must be distinguished from the
remaining elements of a delict, namely wrongfulness, fault, causation and damage.
The presence of conduct does not by itself establish that Ricky is liable. It merely
confirms that his behaviour may be examined under the remaining delictual
requirements.2
The issue is whether Ricky’s failure to secure the scaffolding before leaving the
construction site qualifies as legally recognised conduct. His three arguments
concern the wind, the shift supervisor’s responsibility and the legal status of an
omission.
2. Requirements for Legally Recognised Conduct
For delictual purposes, conduct must involve human behaviour. A person may act
through a positive act, known as a commissio, or through a failure to act, known as
an omissio.3 Therefore, Ricky’s argument that an omission cannot constitute conduct
is legally incorrect. A person’s failure to perform an act can satisfy the conduct
requirement where the person was physically capable of acting but did not do so.4
The conduct must also be voluntary, meaning that it must be susceptible to the
control of the person’s will.5 Voluntariness does not require proof that the person
desired the result. It is sufficient that the person possessed the mental and physical
ability to control the relevant bodily movements.6 For example, a failure to warn
others about danger may be voluntary even though the person did not intend anyone
1
J Neethling and JM Potgieter, Law of Delict (8th edn, LexisNexis 2020) 27.
2
University of South Africa, Law of Delict Study Guide PVL3703 (Unisa 2016) 15–16.
3
Neethling and Potgieter (n 1) 27–32.
4
ibid 28–32.
5
ibid 27–28.
6
ibid 28.
