Van Bosch v Charles

The respondent (purchaser) signed an offer to purchase immovable property from the appellant (seller) for R600 000, paying a R60 000 deposit to the estate agent. Disputes arose when the purchaser refused to sign transfer documents and the seller’s attorneys demanded, inter alia, signature of transfer documents, payment of transfer costs, and provision of a bank guarantee, despite not yet being ready to lodge transfer documents. After the purchaser failed to comply, the seller cancelled the agreement. The purchaser sued in the magistrates’ court for return of the deposit, alleging that the seller’s demands and cancellation amounted to repudiation. The seller denied repudiation. The purchaser excepted to the seller’s plea on the basis that it disclosed no defence. The magistrate dismissed the exception; the Cape High Court upheld it on appeal. The seller then appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was allowed with costs. The order of the Cape High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal against the magistrate’s decision, with costs.

The case clarifies the approach to exceptions to pleas in South African civil procedure, confirming that a plea should not be struck out where it discloses a potentially valid defence. It also reaffirms principles relating to demands for bank guarantees in property transactions and the distinction between premature demands and legitimate steps to place a purchaser in mora.