Bannister’s Print (Pty) Limited v D & A Calendars CC and Another

Bannister’s Print (Pty) Ltd instituted action against D & A Calendars CC and Mr Darryl Bannister for various financial claims. During the litigation, an employee at the respondents’ attorneys’ firm, Mr Lieberthal, who was not an admitted attorney, forged a settlement agreement by altering a draft, forging Darryl Bannister’s initials, and presenting it to court. The forged agreement was made an order of court. Upon discovery, Calendars and Darryl applied to have the settlement declared void ab initio. The High Court granted the application, and subsequent appeals by Bannister’s Print were dismissed.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case clarifies that estoppel and ostensible authority cannot be used to enforce a forged settlement agreement, even where a legal representative was apparently authorised to act. It draws a clear distinction in South African law between unauthorised but genuine agreements and forged documents, reinforcing the requirement of true consensus.