Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 AUGUST 2024

Third-Party Notices: Navigating The Fine Line Between Contractual And Delictual Liability

Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams
Contributor
Adams & Adams

Adams & Adams

Who we are: Established in 1908, Adams & Adams is an internationally recognised and leading African...

View firm profile
Explore more from Adams & Adams

Often, more than one Defendant is sued for damages that a Plaintiff has sustained, whether jointly or in the alternative. Uniform Rule 13 allows a Defendant to issue a third-party...

South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Jean-Paul Rudd
Jean-Paul Rudd
Author LinkedIn connections

Often, more than one Defendant is sued for damages that a Plaintiff has sustained, whether jointly or in the alternative. Uniform Rule 13 allows a Defendant to issue a third-party notice against another Defendant where the former believes it is, in law, entitled to a contribution or indemnification from the latter.

This scenario unfolded in a case instituted in the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg. The Plaintiff was the owner of a Bell Motor Grader ("the grader"), which it leased to the first Defendant for a monthly fee of R107,635.00. On 17 May 2017, the grader was involved in a collision with a dump truck owned by or under the control of the second Defendant.

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.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

End Of Concurrent Jurisdiction: Understanding The New Jurisdictional Boundaries In The Gauteng Division Of The High Court Of South Africa

A significant jurisdictional change has taken effect in South Africa's Gauteng Division of the High Court, ending the concurrent jurisdiction between Johannesburg and Pretoria seats that existed since 2018. Each seat now has defined geographical boundaries based on magisterial districts, requiring practitioners to carefully determine proper jurisdiction when instituting proceedings.
South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ENS
ENS
Article

Ghost Authorities: AI Hallucinations In The Courtroom

A South African Labour Court has stayed disciplinary proceedings after discovering that the chairperson's ruling relied on AI-generated, fictitious case citations. The judgment examines whether blind reliance on artificial intelligence tools constitutes a failure to apply independent legal reasoning, and what consequences flow from submitting fabricated authorities to courts and tribunals.
South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ENS
ENS
Article

Rescission Refused: Negligence Is Not Good Cause Under Rule 42(1)(a) Or The Common Law

The Supreme Court of Appeal examines whether a pension fund can successfully rescind a default judgment when its absence from proceedings resulted from internal administrative failures. The case explores the boundaries between procedural error and voluntary default, testing whether gross negligence in responding to legal process can be excused by the strength of a potential defence.
South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ENS
ENS
Article

No Easy Escape From Gauteng’s Mandatory Mediation Regime

A recent Gauteng High Court judgment confirms that mandatory court-annexed mediation cannot be avoided simply because parties are hostile toward each other or believe the process will be futile. The court ordered an uncooperative defendant to participate in mediation, establishing that only exceptional circumstances will excuse parties from the process introduced by the Directive and Protocol.
South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr
Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr
Article

Frozen Accounts And Fraudulent Funds: Navigating The Rights Of Banks, Customers And SARS

A South African High Court has ruled on the lawfulness of account freezing by banks based on fraud suspicions and affirmed SARS's authority to issue third-party notices under section 179 of the Tax Administration Act. The case arose after a close corporation fraudulently claimed a VAT refund of R3.28 million, transferred R900,000 to an individual's account, prompting the bank to freeze the account and SARS to pursue recovery through a third-party notice.
South AfricaTax
Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams
Article

Nigeria Clarifies Copyright Ownership Of Musical Works

A Nigerian Federal High Court has ruled on a high-stakes copyright dispute over the globally acclaimed gospel song "Way Maker," examining whether a music producer's technical contributions to a recording constitute co-authorship. The judgment clarifies the critical distinction between creative authorship and production services in determining copyright ownership. This decision carries significant implications for how the music industry documents and allocates rights between artists and technical contributor
NigeriaIntellectual Property
Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams
Article

Constitutional Court Delivers Landmark But Incomplete Copyright Ruling. Parliament Must Now Seize The Opportunity To Modernise South Africa’s Copyright Law For The AI Era

South Africa's Constitutional Court has delivered a landmark ruling on the Copyright Amendment Bill, upholding the controversial shift to 'fair use' while striking down broad educational exceptions for textbook copying. The judgment leaves critical questions unresolved about contract terms, ministerial powers, and the Bill's complete silence on generative AI—creating both constraints and opportunities as Parliament must now revisit legislation conceived over a decade ago.
South AfricaIntellectual Property
Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams
Article

Contractual Liability Exclusion Must Be Assessed Against Each Cause Of Action Separately, Not Applied Wholesale Where Multiple Claims Are Pleaded In One Action

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals examined whether a directors' and officers' liability policy's contractual liability exclusion could bar coverage for an entire multi-count lawsuit, or whether each legally distinct cause of action—breach of contract, fraud, and quantum meruit—must be assessed separately against the exclusion's terms. The decision addresses the critical question of how insurers must apply policy exclusions when a single complaint pleads multiple claims arising from the same und
United StatesInsurance
Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams