PVL3704 Assignment 2
(COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2025 (819639) -
DUE 16 September 2025
FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE
PLEASE CONTACT
, Question 1
The correct answer is 4. B has an enrichment claim against A based on the condictio indebiti.
Explanation: The condictio indebiti is an enrichment action used to reclaim an undue
payment made under a bona fide (genuine) mistake. In this scenario, B made a second
payment of R50,000 to A, believing it was due, when in fact it had already been paid by
C. This makes the second payment an undue performance. The mistake was a bona fide
error, not a deliberate or fraudulent act.
Why other options are incorrect:
o
1. Delict: There is no evidence of a fraudulent misstatement by A. A merely
demanded payment, which is not an unlawful act in itself unless it's
proven to be a fraudulent demand.
o
2. Contractual claim: The contract was already fulfilled by the first payment,
so there is no basis for a contractual claim regarding the second payment.
The claim arises from the undue payment, not the contract itself.
o
3. Condictio causa data causa non secuta: This action is for the recovery of
a performance made in terms of a contract that later fails to materialize. It
is not applicable here as the payment was made in error, not in anticipation
of a future event.
o
5. No claim: The rule that a voluntary payment cannot be reclaimed applies
when a person knowingly makes a payment that is not due. B's payment
was made under a mistake, not voluntarily.
Question 2
The correct answer is 1. A has been enriched at the expense of B.
Explanation: The core requirement of any enrichment claim is that the defendant (A) has
been enriched and the plaintiff (B) has been impoverished. The enrichment must be "at
the expense of" the impoverished party. In this case, B's second payment directly caused
a credit in A's account, enriching A and simultaneously causing a loss (impoverishment)
to B.
Why other options are incorrect:
o
2. A has been enriched at the expense of C: This is incorrect. The payment
came from B's account, even if B's bookkeeper C made the transfer. The
impoverishment is B's, not C's.
o
(COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2025 (819639) -
DUE 16 September 2025
FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE
PLEASE CONTACT
, Question 1
The correct answer is 4. B has an enrichment claim against A based on the condictio indebiti.
Explanation: The condictio indebiti is an enrichment action used to reclaim an undue
payment made under a bona fide (genuine) mistake. In this scenario, B made a second
payment of R50,000 to A, believing it was due, when in fact it had already been paid by
C. This makes the second payment an undue performance. The mistake was a bona fide
error, not a deliberate or fraudulent act.
Why other options are incorrect:
o
1. Delict: There is no evidence of a fraudulent misstatement by A. A merely
demanded payment, which is not an unlawful act in itself unless it's
proven to be a fraudulent demand.
o
2. Contractual claim: The contract was already fulfilled by the first payment,
so there is no basis for a contractual claim regarding the second payment.
The claim arises from the undue payment, not the contract itself.
o
3. Condictio causa data causa non secuta: This action is for the recovery of
a performance made in terms of a contract that later fails to materialize. It
is not applicable here as the payment was made in error, not in anticipation
of a future event.
o
5. No claim: The rule that a voluntary payment cannot be reclaimed applies
when a person knowingly makes a payment that is not due. B's payment
was made under a mistake, not voluntarily.
Question 2
The correct answer is 1. A has been enriched at the expense of B.
Explanation: The core requirement of any enrichment claim is that the defendant (A) has
been enriched and the plaintiff (B) has been impoverished. The enrichment must be "at
the expense of" the impoverished party. In this case, B's second payment directly caused
a credit in A's account, enriching A and simultaneously causing a loss (impoverishment)
to B.
Why other options are incorrect:
o
2. A has been enriched at the expense of C: This is incorrect. The payment
came from B's account, even if B's bookkeeper C made the transfer. The
impoverishment is B's, not C's.
o
