South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal

You are here:
SAFLII >>
Databases >>
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal >>
1988 >>
[1988] ZASCA 35
| Noteup
| LawCite
Bank of Lisbon & South Africa v Ornelas and Another (53/85) [1988] ZASCA 35; [1988] 2 All SA 393 (A) (30 March 1988)
Download original files |
Case No 53/85 /MC
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)
Between:
THE BANK OF LISBON & SOUTH AFRICA
LTD Appellant
AND
ANTONIO DE ORNELAS First Respondent
JORGE DE COSTA DE ORNELAS . Second Respondent
Coram: RABIE ACJ et JANSEN, JOUBERT, HEFER et GROSSKOPF JJA.
Heard: 9 MARCH 1987 Delivered: 30 MARCH 1988.
JUDGMENT
JANSEN /.....
1.
JANSEN JA:
I have had the privilege of reading the.
judgment by JOUBERT JA, but I find myself, unfortunately,
driven to a
different conclusion.
The respondents (applicants in the Court a quo) raised
the replicatio doli (generalis), but the underlying principles
are the same as those of the exceptio doli (generalis) .
Whether the exceptio has any role to play in
our modern law is a matter of debate. The chief supporters of
the defence are e g: p van Warmelo (Exceptio Doli 1981
De Jure 203-22); A J Kerr (The Principles of the Law of
Contract 3ed 107-8, 137-42, 174; 1971 SALJ 408; 1981 THRHR
88-9, 93-4; 1981 SALJ 159); P Aronstam (Consumer
Protection, Freedom of Contract and the Law, 168 et seg,
1979/...
2.
1979 THRHR 21 et seq); A D Botha (Unpublished thesis
June
1981, Die Exceptio Doli Generalis in die S A Reg;
1980 THRHR 255-266
-where the author arrives at a contrary
conclusion which he does not continue
to support in his.
thesis). The main critic is J C de Wet. In
his
thesis, "Estoppel by Representation" in die S A Reg (1939),
he deals with the exceptio at pp 83-89. He concludes that "die exceptio doli generalis geen aanspraaklikheids= beginsel bevat nie, en dus nie die grondslag van aanspraak= likheid by estoppel kan vorm nie". This dismissal of the exceptio doli (generalis) from the arena as a separate substantive defence has been adopted by some later writers, including Van Huyssteen (Onbehoorlike Beïnvloeding en
Misbruik/...
3. Misbruik van Omstandighede in die S A Verbintenisreg,
1980, p 23 n 174) and p J J Olivier (Aanspreeklikheid weens Onskuldige
Wanvoorstelling
by Kontraksluiting, 1964 THRHR 20,26,28), in respect of their
particular fields of enquiry. They see the exceptio doli generalis merely
as a label for a defence that the plaintiff,has no cause of action.
Since the
beginning of this century the exceptio has however often been raised in
our Courts as a substantive defence. Single judges felt themselves constrained
to recognize its existence,
but their reactions run the gamut of unbelief
(Aris Enterprises (Finance) (Pty) Ltd v waterberg Koelkamers (Pty) Ltd,
1977(2) SA
436 / ....
4. 436(T)), scepticism (e g North Vaal Mineral co Ltd v
Lovasz, 1961(3) SA 604(T)), circumspection (e g Novick and Another v
Comair Holdings Ltd and Others, 1979(2) 116(W), 155H-157B) and enthusiasm
(Rand Bank Ltd v Rubenstein
1981(2) SA 207(W)). In rscent times' a full bench
of the Transvaal
Provincial Division however had no difficulty in accepting that the exceptio
doli constituted a defence which is not "'n skerp omlynde regswetenskaplike
figuur nie maar 'n regsmiddel wat na gelang van al die feite
in 'n gegewe geval
aan 'n party toegeken word as die Hof meen dat daar anders ontoelaatbare onreg
sou geskied" (Otto en 'n Ander v Heymans (1971(4) SA 148(T), 155 C-E);
and a full bench of the Cape Provincial Division in
Sonday / ...
5. Sonday v Surrey Estate Modern Meat Market (Pty)
Ltd (1983(2) SA 521(C)) found it to be clear that the exceptio doli
generalis "has been accepted as part of our law and applied as such for a
considerable period of time, both by Provincial Divisions as well
as the
Appellate Division" (per TEBBUTT J). This Court has certainly always
assumed that such a defence at least exists. Whether it has in fact gone further
and
applied the underlying principles is a question that will be returned to
later.
The roots of the exceptio in its modern guise must be found in the treatment of the subject in the Digest title De Doli Mali et Metus Exceptione (D.44.4),
where / ...
6. where inter alia the following is found :-
Ideo autem hanc exceptionem praetor proposuit,
ne cui dolus suus per occasionem juris civilis contra naturalem aeguitatem prosit.(p.44.4.i.l).
Seen as a
substantive defence the exceptio would imply
that in appropriate
circumstances a Court could grant
relief where the strict law would have an effect
contra
naturalem aequitatem, and in so doing it would modify
the
law. Broadly speaking this is what happened in Rome
and in the course of
time new defences developed as a
result (e g exceptio non numeratae pecuniae etc).
Critics of the
survival of the exceptio would have one
believe that the defences so
developed constituted a numerus
clausus to this day. This would deny the possibility
of / ...
7. of the law being adapted according to the exigencies of the
times and in the light of the changing mores and concepts of fairness and
proper conduct. It must be emphasized that seen as a substantive defence the
exceptio is no longer a procedural device, as
it once was in the hands of the Praetor to enable
the objective standard
of bona fides to be applied
to negotia which would otherwise
have given rise to
judicia stricti juris.
It / ...
8.
It is said that the recognition of the exceptio
doli in this sense would be
an infraction of the freedom
of contract and of the principle that pacta
servanda sunt -
that it would lead to legal uncertainty. Freedom
of
contract, the principles of pacta servanda sunt and
certainty
are not however absolute values. They did
not prevent the modification in
England of the common
law by Eguity, which inter alia gives relief
against
"unconscionable"bargains :-
"There is a well developed jurisdiction in equity independent of the principles as to undue influence to set aside catching and unconscientious bargains. The English cases are centred in the last century. But in Australasia the jurisdiction still flourishes." (Meagher, Gummow and Lehane: Eguity, para 1601).
Moreover / ...
9.
Moreover, the twin concepts of freedom of contract and
pacta servanda sunt have, during this century, increasingly
come under assáult as a result of inter alia rampant
inflation, monopolistic practices giving rise to unequal
bargaining power, and the large-scale use of standard
form contracts (often couched in small print). (Cf.
Asser-Rutten II,
Algemene Leer der Overeenkomsten, 1979,
Chapter V). In 1895 the Dutch
jurist Molengraaf
expressed the following view :-
"Meer en meer wint de overtuiging veld dat
het dogma der contractsvrijheid niet
als de hoogste wijsheid mag gelden. Men is gaan inzien, dat er hoogere beginselen zijn dan het pacta sunt servanda; dat het recht slechts dan een, 'ars boni et aegui' mag heeten, als het in overeenstemming is met ethische beginselen en tot doorvoering daarvan heeft medegewerkt."
(as ) / ...
10. (as cited by Van Huyssteen op cit p 128 n5). Sub=
sequent developments in the Netherlands confirm his
assessment. The
operational field of B W Art 1374.3
("Zij [overeenkomsten] moeten te goeder trouw worden
ten uitvoer gebragt")
has expanded to include not only
the supplementing óf an agreement
("aanvullende werking")
as a result of "de eisen van redelikheid en
billikheid",
but also the limitation of an agreement
("beperkende
werking") (cf P Abas, Beperkende werking van de
goede
trouw, 1972). This development has culminated in the
Nieuw
Burgerlijk Wetboek Art 6.5.3.1:-
"1. Een overeenkomst heeft niet alleen door partijen overeengekomen rechtsgevolgen, maar ook die welke, naar de aard van de overeenkomst, uit de wet, de gewoonte of de eisen van
redelijkheid en billijkheid voortvloeien.
2./...
11.
2. Een tussen partijen als gevolg van de overeenkomst geldende regel is niet van toepassing,voor zover dit.in de gegeven omstandigheden naar maatstaven van redelijk= heid en billijkheid onaanvaardbaar zou zijn."
In the United States a somewhat similar
development has
taken place. The Uniform Commercial Code
contains
provision against "unconscionable" contracts (U C C
para 2.302)
and this has, according to Calamari and
Perillo (Contracts 2d
1970 para 9-39) "entered the
general law of contracts". They cite the
Restatement
of the Law of Contract 2d (1979) Vol 2 para 208 :-
"If a contract or term thereof is uncon= scionable at the time the contract is made a court may refuse to enforce the contract, or may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable term, or may so limit the application of any unconscionable term as to avoid any unconscionable result."
The / ...
12. The authors in para 9-40
point out :-
"'Unconscionable' is a word that defies lawyerlike definition. It is a term borrowed from moral philosophy and ethics. As close to a definition as we are likely to get is 'that which affronts the sense of decency'."
They also say in para 9-37 that "the legislative purpose
of the section (viz of the U C C) is illuminated by the
following language in the official comment :-
'This section is intended to make it possible for the courts to police explicitly against contracts or clauses which they find to be unconscionable. In the past such policing has been accomplished by adverse construction of language, by manipulation of the rules of offer and acceptance or by determinations that the clause is contrary to public policy or to the dominant purpose of the contract.' "
The / ...
13.
The ideal that the law should be certain,
is often
contrasted with adjudication by the length
of the Chancellor's foot. In
relation to such an
argument adduced in Preller and Others v Jorcaan
(1956(1)
SA 483(A4) against the acceptance of an extended meaning
of
dolus and the recognition of a remedy based on undue
influence, FAGAN JA, delivering the judgment of the
majority, said (at 493
2): "Daar is egter vertakkings
van die reg waarin uit die aard van die saak
die beginsels
elasties moet wees omdat dit alleen aangedui kan word
in
woorde waarvan die toepassing in grensgevalle soms moeilik
mag wees,
maar dit in sigself kan geen rede wees om 'n
andersins gesonde remedie uit ons reg te weer nie".
Apart from statutory innovations, there are in any event a
number / ...
14.
number of well recognized instances in our law of contract
where freedom
of contract and the principle of pacta
servanda sunt and the ideal of certainty give way to other
considerations. A few examples may be mentioned. A
creditor has a right to
specific performance but a Court
may in the exercise of its discretion refuse
to make such
an order. The discretion
"is aimed at preventing an injustice - for cases do arise where justice demands that a plaintiff be denied his right to per= formance - and the basic principle thus is that the order which the Court makes should not produce an unjust result which will be the case, eg, if, in the particular circumstances, the order will operate unduly harshly on the defendant. Another principle is that the remedy of specific performance should always be granted or withheld in accordance with
legal and public policy "
(per HEFER JA: Benson v S A Mutual Life Assurance Society 1986(1) SA 776(A), 783 D-E).
A restraint of trade is not per se invalid or unen=
forceable /...
15. forceable - but it is so if it offends against the
public interest (Magna Alloys and Research (SA) (Pty)
Ltd v
Ellis 1984(4) SA 874(A)). In delivering the
judgment of the Court, RABIE CJ points out :-
"Omdat opvattings oor wat in die openbare belang is, of wat die openbare belang vereis, nie altyd dieselfde is nie en van tyd tot tyd kan verander, kan daar ook geen numerus clausus wees van soorte ooreenkomste wat as strydig met die openbare belang beskou kan word nie. Dit sou dus volgens die beginsels van ons reg moontlik wees om te sê dat 'n ooreenkoms wat iemand se handelsvryheid inkort teen die openbare belang is indien die omstandighede van die betrokke geval sodanig is dat die Hof daarvan oortuig is dat die afdwing van die betrokke ooreenkoms die openbare belang sou skaad." (891 H-I).
"Die opvatting dat 'n persoon wat 'n beperking wil afdwing nie die las dra om te bewys dat dit redelik inter partes is nie, bring nie mee dat oorwegings van die redelikheid of onredelikheid van 'n beperking nie van belang is of kan wees nie." (893 H).
Die /...
16
"Die belangrike vraag is dus nie of 'n oor= eenkoms van so 'n aard is dat dit ab initio ongeldig is nie, maar of dit 'n ooreenkoms is wat die Hof, gesien die vereistes van die openbare belang, nie behoort af te dwing nie." (895 D-E).
The Court may reduce a stipulated penalty "to such an
extent as it may consider equitable in the circumstances"
(Act 15 of 1962, section 3 - reinstating the common law).
Not only contracts against public interest or public
policy are subject to
control by the Court, but also
those offending the boni mores. In this
field
reference must be made to the sense of justice -("regsgevoel")
of
the community, as is the case in delict, where it is
now recognized that
there is no numerus clausus of actionable wrongs
Perforce our Courts must in a variety of
cases work with the prevailing mores and the sense of
justice / ....
17.
justice of the community as a norm. In principle
there can be no real objection in the case of the
exceptio to
determine an objective standard of aeguitas
along similar lines.
In discussing the exceptio reference is some=
times made to its fate in German law. ït
is said that at
the time of the introduction of the BGB it was a dead
letter. However, the true position seems to be that
it was considered obsolete because its underlying
principles were absorbed
into the requirement of bona
fides (cf BGB article 242).
Reference to a few writers
will illustrate the general approach: A Brinz,
Lehrbuch
der Pandekten (1884) p 379:-
"So/...
SEE ORIGINAL JUDGMENT PAGE
18.
19.
H Dernburg - P Sokolowski (System des Römischen Rechts
(1911)) p 323-4 :-
SEE ORIGINAL JUDGMENT TEXT
(However, in the end art 138 ("a transaction that offends
good morals
(guten Sitten) is void") proved to be a more
fruitful source of development. ( Cf John P Dawson:
Unconscionable
Coercion: The German Version, 1976 Harvard
Law Review, p 1041).
In our law the requisite, of good faith has not
as
yet absorbed the principles of the exceptio doli nor
has the concept
of contra bonos mores as yet been spe=
cifically applied in this
field. To deny the exceptio
right of place would leave a vacuum.
This / ....
20.
This Court has certainly not considered the exceptio doli to be an empty shell. In Trust Bank van Afrika Bpk v Eksteen (1964(3) SA 402(A) at 411 A-C) the majority of this Court referred inter alia to Waterval Estate and Goldmining Co Ltd v New Bullion Gold Mining Co Ltd (1905 TS 717)as a case on estpppel where "nie nagelaat is om na die grondslae waarop dit in ons reg sou rus, te verwys nie". In that case CURLEWIS J said that "the doctrine of estoppel in pais is merely an extendec interpretation of the principles underlying the exceptio doli mali". He specifically refers to D.44.4.1. Clearly what happened here was that a new defence, not specifically described in our authorities, was thus accepted on the ground of "natural justice". To that
extent / ...
21.
extent the law was modified. In Preller and Others v
Jordaan
(supra) the majority of the Court extended the
meaning of dolus
as to enable an equitable remedy on the
ground of undue influence to be
adopted where the existing
authorities did not go as far. (This was a case of
dolus
praeteritus, but it is nevertheless an instance where
the
law was modified as a result of equitable consideration).
In
Weinerlein v Goch Buildings Ltd (1925 AD 282) the Court
accepted a
remedy of rectification not on any contractual
theory of consensus but
as a result of equity. It is true
that DE VILLIERS JA cited what he
considered to be direct
authority for the remedy (at p 289), but both WESSELS
and
KOTZe JJA refer to the exceptio doli. In Mouton v
Hanekom
(1959(3) SA 35(A) at 40 B-C) a full bench of this Court
applied the
following dictum of WESSELS JA (at p 292 of
the Weinerlein-case):-
"The /...
22.
"The exception (exceptio doli) lies whenever the court regards it as a fraudulent act to rely on your summum jus when you know full well that your claim is founded on a mutual error."
The existence of the exceptio doli as a
defence based on equity is demonstrated by the decisions
of this Court;
moreover, our lower courts have over=
whelmingly assumed for many years such
a defence to be
available. Although the underlying principle is to
be
traced back to the Digest it seems, in view of the afore=
going, to be
of no crucial import whether the leges dealing
with the
exceptio were received in Holland or fell into
disuse. However, it is
significant that Groenewegen
in his De Legibus Abrogatis, where he deals with D.44.4.,
does / ...
23.
does not state the relevant leges to be inapplicable. Nor does Voet (adl Pandectas) do so under this Title, although he is careful to state where the modern law differs in other instances. In 1793, J van der Linden
(ad Voet 1.1.2) says the following :-
"Jure nos Romano uti, quoties scriptae apud nos Leges, vel recepti mores & consuetudines de re controversa nihil certi statuunt, satis constat, Merula Man. van Proced. Lib. I. Tit 4 Cap.l $ 5 n. 6 nunc enim Jus Romanum, ut jus commune, esse receptum, multae posteriorum Principum, Caroli inprimis V. & Philippi II, multae item Ordinum Hollandiae Leges significant: palam guippe, deficientibus Legibus propriis, remittunt ad ius scriptum vel commune, quo utrogue Romanorum Civile intelligi certum est. Atque ita servat utraque Curia, nisi vel manifesta Reipublicae ratio, vel perpetuae Consuetudinis
auctoritas obstet. Bynkershoek in Praefat.
ad observ.jur. Rom. part. 1. pag. 1 & 2."
This /...
24.
This must be read in conjunction with Van der Keessel's
Rule 11 as stated in his Praelectiones :-
"Wie die Romeinse Reg aanvoer vir sover dit nie openlik strydig met uitdruklike wette of 'n bekende gebruiksregreël of die stelsel van die vaderlandse reg of 'n ander instelling van die staat is nie, het daarmee 'n goeie grond vir sy eis aangevoer en word nie verplig om die besondere erkenning daarvan te bewys nie." (Transl. Gonin Vol I p 81). It would seem that in the absence of contrary statutes or
usage it must be accepted that the principles of the
exceptio doli were in fact part of the Roman Law that was
received in the Netherlands. Although there appears to
be no or little mention of the exceptio, in the sense
discussed above, being used in practice, the occasion may
not have presented itself in view of the social circumstances
existing and the mores of the times. Van Huyssteen
(at /...
25. (at p 72) refers to Obs. Tum Novae vol 2 nr 1049 where
the Hooge Raad had applied D.45.1.36. Van Huyssteen
considers the lex was cited "heeltemal buite sy betekenis",
but was this not rather an example of the Court using the principles of the
exceptio to extend a remedy where there
would not otherwise have been
one available?
The exceptio doli generalis constitutes a
substantive defence, based on the sense of justice of the community. As such it is closely related to the defences
based on public policy (interest) or boni mores (cf Ismail v Ismail 1983(1) SA 1006(A),1025F-1026C). Conceivably they may overlap: to enforce a grossly unreasonable contract may in appropriate circumstances be considered as against public policy or boni mores. By the nature of things no general definition can be given of what would consti= tute dolus. In Zuurbekom Ltd v Union Corporation
Ltd / ....
26.
Ltd (1947(1) SA 514(A)) an example is to be found: where the
enforcement of a "remedy by the plaintiff would cause some great ineguity
and
would amount to unconscionable conduct on his part" (per TINDALL JA at.p
537). However, each case must be judged on its own facts in the light of the
sense of justice of the community.
The facts in the present case present a
number of salient features: the respondents were suppliants for an overdraft (or
its increase);
they had not equal bargaining power with the Bank; standard forms
with standard terms were used by the Bank; the Bank stipulated
for security far
beyond its needs; the respondents never
actually / ...
27.
actually contemplated that the security would cover anything but the overdraft. These facts go beyond. mere unreasonableness of the contract per se (cf Paddock Motors v Igesund 1976(3) SA 16(A)). In my view it would offend the sense of justice of the community to allow the Bank to use the strict wording of the documents to retain the securities after payment of the overdraft. I find support for this in the views expressed by BOTHA J in Rand Bank Ltd v Rubenstein (1981(2) SA 207(W)) and that of the judge a quo in the present matter.
I would dismiss the appeal.