King Price Insurance Company Limited v Mhlongo

Mr Sizwe Antonio Mhlongo was insured by King Price Insurance Company Limited under a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance policy for his Mercedes Benz E200. In 2018 the vehicle was involved in a collision and was written off. King Price rejected his claim and cancelled the policy. Mr Mhlongo sued King Price in the Regional Court for breach of contract, claiming damages of R374 960.50, which he pleaded as the fair, reasonable or market-related value of the vehicle. At trial, however, the only evidence he led on quantum was a settlement quotation from Standard Bank reflecting the outstanding amount owed to the financier. No evidence was presented regarding the actual market value of the vehicle. The Regional Court found in his favour, and the High Court on appeal upheld that decision. King Price appealed further to the Supreme Court of Appeal, with leave limited to whether the quantum of the claim had been proved.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria was set aside and replaced with an order upholding the appeal and granting absolution from the instance in favour of King Price, with costs.

The case reaffirms fundamental principles of South African civil procedure and evidence, particularly that a plaintiff must prove the case it pleads and that courts may not grant relief based on an unpleaded or different cause of action. It underscores the requirement of congruence between pleadings and evidence and clarifies that defendants are not obliged to prove an alternative quantum where the plaintiff has failed to discharge its onus.