PVL3703
ASSIGNMENT 1 (SEMESTER 1)
DUE DATE: March 2025
PREVIEW:
QUESTION 1
In order to determine whether Lethabo acted for the purposes of the law of delict, we must focus on
the element of conduct (also known as an act or actus). Conduct is one of the five essential elements
of delictual liability in South African law, alongside wrongfulness, fault, causation, and harm. For a
successful delictual claim, Zanele must establish that Lethabo’s actions constituted legally relevant
conduct.
1. The Requirement of Conduct in Delict
In delict, conduct refers to a voluntary human act or omission that causes harm. The key issue in this
case is whether Lethabo’s actions can be classified as voluntary conduct given that he was experiencing
an epileptic fit.
The courts have long established that conduct must be voluntary for liability to arise. If an act occurs
due to factors beyond the individual's control, such as a reflex action, unconsciousness, or a medical
condition that removes volition, it may not constitute legally relevant conduct.
2. The Test for Voluntariness
The leading case in this regard is S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A), where the court emphasized that
involuntary conduct, such as that caused by automatism, is not legally recognized as "conduct" for the
purposes of criminal or delictual liability.
Disclaimer:
The materials provided are intended for educational and informational purposes only. They should not be
submitted as original work or used in violation of any academic institution's policies. The buyer is solely
responsible for how the materials are used.
ASSIGNMENT 1 (SEMESTER 1)
DUE DATE: March 2025
PREVIEW:
QUESTION 1
In order to determine whether Lethabo acted for the purposes of the law of delict, we must focus on
the element of conduct (also known as an act or actus). Conduct is one of the five essential elements
of delictual liability in South African law, alongside wrongfulness, fault, causation, and harm. For a
successful delictual claim, Zanele must establish that Lethabo’s actions constituted legally relevant
conduct.
1. The Requirement of Conduct in Delict
In delict, conduct refers to a voluntary human act or omission that causes harm. The key issue in this
case is whether Lethabo’s actions can be classified as voluntary conduct given that he was experiencing
an epileptic fit.
The courts have long established that conduct must be voluntary for liability to arise. If an act occurs
due to factors beyond the individual's control, such as a reflex action, unconsciousness, or a medical
condition that removes volition, it may not constitute legally relevant conduct.
2. The Test for Voluntariness
The leading case in this regard is S v Chretien 1981 (1) SA 1097 (A), where the court emphasized that
involuntary conduct, such as that caused by automatism, is not legally recognized as "conduct" for the
purposes of criminal or delictual liability.
Disclaimer:
The materials provided are intended for educational and informational purposes only. They should not be
submitted as original work or used in violation of any academic institution's policies. The buyer is solely
responsible for how the materials are used.
