Le Roux v Zietsman and Another

The respondents purchased a guesthouse in Tzaneen from the appellant for R1.3 million in July 2011. Prior to the sale, water stains were observed, and the appellant assured the respondents and the estate agent that the roof had leaked previously but had been repaired and would not leak again. Shortly after occupation, heavy rains caused extensive leaking throughout the entire roof, flooding the guesthouse and damaging furniture and linen. The respondents had to borrow funds to repair the roof and were unable to operate the guesthouse for two months, suffering loss of income. Expert evidence revealed that the roof suffered from long-standing latent structural defects due to inferior design and workmanship, which would have existed from inception. The appellant had occupied the property for five years prior to sale and had attempted temporary repairs using plastic sheeting.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the orders of the regional court and the Limpopo High Court holding the appellant liable for damages were confirmed.

The case reinforces South African delictual principles relating to fraudulent non-disclosure and misrepresentation in the sale of property, particularly where latent defects are involved. It confirms that a seller who knows of latent defects and fails to disclose them cannot rely on a voetstoots clause. The judgment also underscores the duty to disclose defects where the seller is aware of the purchaser’s intended use of the property.