Jalite (Pty) Ltd v Shanghai Furniture Import & Export CC

Jalite (Pty) Ltd leased business premises comprising two warehouses and yards to Shanghai Furniture Import & Export CC in terms of a written offer to rent accepted in 2012. The agreed rental was R70 000 per month plus VAT. The defendant failed to take occupation and pay rental, alleging that it was induced to conclude the lease by a material misrepresentation that the premises measured approximately 2000 square metres, whereas the actual size was substantially less. On this basis, the defendant purported to cancel the lease and counterclaimed for repayment of its deposit and the cost of improvements. The trial court rejected the defence and counterclaim and found for Jalite. On appeal, the Gauteng Local Division overturned the trial court’s decision, finding that the size of the premises was a material term and that Jalite had misrepresented it. Jalite appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal succeeded with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the appeal to the High Court with costs, thereby restoring the trial court’s judgment in favour of Jalite.

The case affirms principles governing misrepresentation in contract, particularly in commercial leases, and clarifies that a statement of approximate size does not necessarily constitute a material term. It reinforces the limited circumstances in which appellate courts may interfere with trial courts’ factual findings and underscores that rental need not be based on square meterage unless expressly agreed.