E C Chenia & Sons CC v Lamé & Van Blerk

The respondent, a partnership of consulting civil and structural engineers, sued the appellant in the Vereeniging magistrate’s court for payment of R22 852,80 for professional engineering services allegedly rendered at the appellant’s instance and request. The respondent relied on a letter dated 31 January 2002 setting out the proposed scope of work and fees, and a subsequent telephone conversation on 12 March 2002 in which the appellant’s representative instructed the engineer to proceed with the work. The appellant denied having requested the services or having concluded any agreement with the respondent. The magistrate found in favour of the respondent, and the High Court dismissed the appellant’s appeal. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The case clarifies the distinction between express and tacit contracts in South African law and confirms that an express contract may arise from a combination of written and oral communications. It also reinforces the principle that departures from pleadings are only impermissible where they cause prejudice, and highlights the duty of litigants to object timeously to evidence not covered by pleadings.