PVL3701 Assignment 1 (DETAILED ANSWERS) Semester 1 2024 (890697) - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED

PVL3701 Assignment 1 (DETAILED ANSWERS) Semester 1 2024 (890697) - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED Answers, guidelines, workings and references..... ...................................................... In June 2023, John bought a house in Sandton. At the time, he decided to install a solar system due to the unreliable electricity provision in South Africa. He bought 20 solar panels, 4 batteries and an inverter on credit from the “Sun Company”. The Sun Company installed the system in July 2023. The agreement between John and the Sun Company provided that John would only become the owner of the solar panels, the batteries and the inverter after all the instalments were paid. It further provided that the Sun Company could remove the entire system, should John, fall into arrears with payment of the instalments. John decided to move to Cape Town and, before all the instalments of the solar system were paid, he sold the house to Lindiwe. After registration of the property in Lindiwe’s name and after Lindiwe moved in, the technicians of the Sun Company arrived at Lindiwe’s house to remove the solar system. Lindiwe refused to allow them access to her house, but they explained to her that John stopped paying the instalments of the solar system and that they were therefore allowed to remove the system. Lindiwe asks her son, Nkosinathi, who is a third-year LLB student at Unisa, for advice. Nkosinathi explained that the solar system belongs to Lindiwe because it became part of the land by means of inaedificatio (accession by building). Nkosinathi further explained that the South African courts apply different criteria to determine whether a movable thing became permanently attached to land namely, the nature and purpose of the attached thing; the manner and degree of attachment; and the intention of the person annexing the movable or the intention of the owner of the movable. He added that these criteria have been applied in different ways by the South African courts. Against this background answer the following questions: Question 1 Why is inaedificatio classified as a form of original acquisition of ownership? Fully substantiate your answer with reference to the specific page(s) of your Study Guide that you consulted to answer this question. Do not insert footnotes – simply refer to the relevant page(s) of the Study Guide that you consulted in brackets after your answer. Your answer should not exceed 6 lines. (3) Evaluation criteria Not yet achieved Partially achieved Achieved The reason why inaedificatio is an original form of acquisition of ownership is clearly explained using own words. 0 1 2 5 Correct reference to the relevant page number(s) of the Study Guide in brackets. The answer does not exceed 6 lines. 0 1/2 1 Question 2 Fully advise Lindiwe about the correctness of Nkosinathi’s advice. In your answer do not repeat the criteria, rather focus on the interpretation of the third criterion (the subjective intention criterion) by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Konstanz Properties (Pty) Ltd v Wm Spilhaus en Kie (Wp) Bpk (1996 (3) SA 283 (A)). Take note that Konstanz Properties (Pty) Ltd is one of the cases that you only need to study to the extent that it is discussed in the Study Guide. Therefore, you must refer to the Konstanz Property (Pty) Ltd case as discussed in the Study Guide. In your answer, evaluate the correctness of the approach of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Konstanz Properties (Pty) Ltd considering that inaedificatio is classified as an original method of acquisition of ownership. Substantiate your answer with reference to the specific page number(s) in the Study Guide that you consulted to answer this question. Do not insert footnotes – simply refer to the relevant page(s) that you consulted in brackets after your answer. Your answer should not exceed 15 lines.