Consumer Information

Author: The Supreme Court of Appeal of SA Judgment

Neutral citation: Banda v Van der Spuy (781/2011) [2013] ZASCA 23 (22
March 2013)

Heard: 7 March 2013
Delivered: 22 March 2013



Knowledge by the sellers of a house that its roof was latently defective and that repairs to it had not properly rectified the latent defect, which they fraudulently concealed, vitiated the effect of a voetstoots clause – an alternative cause of action based upon a fraudulent misrepresentation by the sellers as to the existence of a guarantee in respect of the repairs, which induced the buyers to purchase the house – alternatively, agree upon the price, was causally related to the damage suffered, being the cost of repairing the roof – this was so despite the fact that the guarantee did not cover all of the defects which caused the roof to leak and sellers were unaware of an additional cause of the leak.


On appeal from: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg (Boruchowitz J sitting as court of first instance):

1 The appeal is upheld with costs.

2 The order of the high court is set aside and is substituted with the following order:

‘The defendants are ordered jointly and severally to pay to the plaintiffs the sum of R449 499 together with interest thereon at the rate of 15.5 per cent per annum from the date of judgment, being 23 September 2011, and costs of suit including the qualifying fees of Mr Visagie.’

The Judgment can be viewed here: