IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: CCT185/2013 In the matter between:
COUNTRY CLOUD TRADING CC Appellant and
THE MEC FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT, GAUTENG Respondent
RESPONDENT’S PRACTICE NOTE
NAME OF THE PARTIES AND CASE NUMBER
1. The names of the parties and the case number appear above.
2. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the SCA which held that the respondent could not be held liable to a stranger (applicant) to a contract it concluded with someone else, for the cancellation of that contract.
3. The following issues are to be determined:
2
3.1 Whether legal and public policies require that the respondent should be held delictually liable to a third party where it cancelled a contract it held with another party.
4. The following portions are of the record are necessary in the determination of the appeal:
4.1 Appellant’s particulars of claim,1
4.2 agreement between Country Cloud, T J Lupepe and iLima;2
4.3 the evidence of T J Lupepe;3
4.4 the evidence of Brian Weckford Webber;4
4.5 the evidence of Mohlomphegi Thulare;5
4.6 letter from Buthelezi to Lupepe; and,
4.7 judgment of the SCA.
1 Vol1 p3 – 11.
2 Vol 1 p18 – 35.
3 Vol 3 p201 – 300, Vol 4 p301 – 310.
4 Vol 4 p313 – 321.
5 Vol 4 p328 – 389.
3
5. It is estimated that the entire hearing should take no more than 5 hours.
6. The judgment and order of the SCA should be upheld and the appeal dismissed with costs.
7. The legal and policy do not require that the conduct of the respondent be regarded as wrongful. The indeterminate liability and the vulnerability of the appellant to harm are pointers against the imposition of liability upon the respondent.
8. The appellant claim is for the principal amount and profit.
LIST OF AUTHORITIES ON WHICH PARTICULAR RELIANCE IS PLACED
F v Minister of Safety and Security 2012 (1) SA 536 (CC)
4
________________________
V S Notshe SC
_______________________
B Shabalala
Counsel for the respondent
