Kelbrick and Others v Nelson Attorneys and Another

The appellants sold their immovable properties to a developer, Status Homes, under agreements drafted by the first respondent attorneys, who also acted as conveyancers. Instead of receiving cash, the appellants were to receive newly built sectional title units in a proposed development. Transfer occurred in July 2007, but the development required removal of restrictive title deed conditions before construction could lawfully commence. Those restrictions were only removed on 26 August 2008, after which construction began in October 2008 but halted in February 2009 due to lack of finance. Status Homes was later liquidated. The appellants sued the respondent attorneys for negligence, alleging failure to advise them of risks. The attorneys raised a special plea that the claims had prescribed, contending prescription began by July 2008 due to delays and apparent breach by the developer.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the court a quo was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the first defendant’s special plea of prescription with costs.

The case clarifies the application of section 12 of the Prescription Act in professional negligence claims, emphasising that prescription does not run merely because problems or delays arise, but only once the creditor has knowledge of facts establishing a complete cause of action. It reinforces the high onus on a defendant raising prescription and is significant in attorney negligence and development-related litigation.