Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 FEBRUARY 2006

Court Clarifies the ‘In Duplum’ Rule

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr
Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr
Contributor
Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr (CDH) is one of the largest full-service business law firms in South Africa,...

View firm profile
Explore more from Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr

There has been much debate in the past about the meaning and effect of the in duplum rule. Any uncertainty has been clarified by a recent judgement of the Supreme Court of Appeal, delivered in September 2005 in the matter of Ethekwini Municipality v Verulam Medicentre (Pty) Ltd.

South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

There has been much debate in the past about the meaning and effect of the in duplum rule. Any uncertainty has been clarified by a recent judgement of the Supreme Court of Appeal, delivered in September 2005 in the matter of Ethekwini Municipality v Verulam Medicentre (Pty) Ltd.

The in duplum rule, basically stated, provides that interest on a debt stops running when unpaid interest equals the sum of the unpaid capital.

The Medicentre claimed repayment of a sum paid to the Municipality in terms of an agreement, plus interest on the amount. The Municipality's defence was that the in duplum rule applied and that the Medicentre's claim was thus limited to the capital amount of the debt and the interest thereon that did not exceed the capital sum.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from