Description
PVL3702 ASSIGNMENT 1 2026
DUE 31 OF MARCH 2026
Jabu owns a jewelry store. He recently bought what he believed to be a genuine
diamond ring for R50 000 from one of his suppliers. Raymond visits the store and
offers Jabu R80 000 for the same ring, and Jabu accepts the offer. The contract
was concluded onthe basis that the sale item is a genuine diamond ring.
Subsequently, when Raymond……….
Jabu sold a ring to Raymond for R80 000, both parties believing it to be a genuine
diamond. It was later discovered that the ring is fake. Raymond seeks advice on the
validity of the contract. The legal question concerns the effect of a common mistake
(both parties shared the same false assumption) on the validity of the contract. I will
also analyse the issue by reference to Van Reenen Steel (Pty) Ltd v Smith NO 2002 (4)
SA 264 (SCA) and City of Cape Town (CMC Administration) v Bourbon-Leftley NO 2006
(3) SA 488 (SCA) , as instructed.
2. The Legal Problem Identified
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.