Alfred Mcalpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration
Jurisdiction | South Africa |
Judge | Rumpff Wn HR, Botha AR, Jansen AR, Muller AR en Corbett Wn AR |
Judgment Date | 20 May 1974 |
Citation | 1974 (3) SA 506 (A) |
Court | Appellate Division |
Rumpff, Wn. H.R.:
Hierdie appèl is teen sekere bevele gegee in F die Transvaalse Provinsiale Afdeling deur Regter HIEMSTRA. In daardie Hof was die appellant die eiser en die respondent die verweerder in 'n saak wat voortgespruit het uit 'n kontrak aangegaan tussen die partye in November 1966 waaronder eiser onderneem het om deel T4/8 van die nasionale pad, 'n dubbelbaan G deurpad, ongeveer 22 myl lank, tussen Pretoria en Bronkhorstspruit, te bou. Die kontrak het bestaan uit die gebruiklike dokumente wat by so 'n soort ooreenkoms deel vorm van die kontrak, nl. die tendervorm, memorandum van ooreenkoms, spesifikasie, algemene kontrakvoorwaardes, spesiale kontrakbepalings, planne en tekeninge en hoeveelheidslys. H Luidens die kontrak was die "ingenieur", soos daarin omskryf, die firma Van Niekerk, Kleyn en Edwards.
In sy besonderhede van eis het eiser 'n hoofeis ingestel en sekere alternatiewe eise A, B, C, D, E en F. In die hoofeis en in elk van die alternatiewe eise A, B, C, D en E is 'n som geld geëis, terwyl in die alternatiewe eis F 'n bevel gevra is dat eiser geregtig is op vergoeding vir sekere werk volgens sekere tariewe. Die verweerder het die eise bestry en sekere getuienis is voor die Verhoorhof gelê aangaande o.a. faktore wat tenderaars
Rumpff Wn HR
in aanmerking neem wanneer hulle hul pryse vasstel by 'n kontrak soos die onderhawige, wat 'n sgn. prys - en metingkontrak (rate and measurement contract) is, asook die aard en omvang van veranderings wat die eiser, volgens instruksies van die ingenieur, aan die werk gedoen het. Die A geskilpunte tussen die partye het regsvrae opgewerp sowel as feitlike dispute oor soveel individuele items dat, wat laasgenoemde betref, 'n uiters lang en duur verhoorsaak in die vooruitsig gestel is. Dit het aanleiding gegee tot 'n ooreenkoms tussen die partye waaronder o.a. die oorspronklike smeekbedes verander is sodat die Verhoorhof deur middel van verklarende bevele 'n uitspraak kon gee oor die regsgeldigheid B van die smeekbedes in die lig van die besonderhede van die onderskeie eise. Die Verhoorregter het die eiser in die ongelyk gestel ten opsigte van elkeen van die smeekbedes en daar word tans geappelleer teen al die bevele van die Verhoorhof behalwe dié ten opsigte van die smeekbedes onder die alternatiewe eise B en C.
C Voordat die onderskeie smeekbedes behandel word, is dit nodig om 'n weergawe van sekere relevante feite te gee wat o.a. bevat is in 'n dokument, gedatter 20 Februarie 1970, wat 'n opsomming weergee van die besonderhede waarop eiser se vorderings gebaseer is. Nadat die eiser die memorandum van ooreenkoms op 1 November 1966 onderteken het, en die verweerder op 4 November D 1966, is dit ooreengekom dat die aanvangsdatum van die werk 4 November 1966 sou wees, en dat die kontrakperiode vir voltooiing van die werk 30 maande sou wees wat die voltooiingsdatum op 4 Mei 1969 sou stel. Die kontrakwaarde wat in die memorandum van ooreenkoms genoem word en wat bereken is volgens die pryse wat daarin verskyn, was R4 811 074,16 wat 'n E provisionele bedrag van R300 000 ingesluit het. Op 30 Desember 1966 het eiser, kragtens klousules 102 - 5 van die spesifikasies, 'n program opgestel, wat die volgorde bevat waarvolgens die werk sou gedoen word, en ook die vorderingstempo wat eiser wou handhaaf om die voltooiing van die werk op 4 Mei 1969 te verwesenlik. Gedurende die uitvoering F van die werk is op verskillende geleenthede verlenging van tyd deur die verweerder toegestaan en die kontrakwaarde van die werk, hierbo genoem, het gestyg tot R6 239 561,12 aan die einde van April 1970. Behalwe hierdie bedrag wat betaal is, het eiser appèl aangeteken by die Direkteur van die Transvaalse Paaiedepartement ten opsigte van bedrae wat R356 173,28 beloop G het, en was daar onder bespreking met die ingenieur items ten bedrae van R42 575,60, ten opsigte waarvan geen uitsluitsel gegee is nie, en was daar ook opmetings aan die gang as gevolg waarvan 'n beraamde bedrag van R100 000 tot die eis van eiser bygevoeg kon word.
Afgesien van die toestand op 20 Februarie 1970, soos blyk uit H die voornoemde opsomming, toon die getuienis aan dat 'n voltooiingsertifikaat namens verweerder aan eiser op 5 Mei 1970 uitgereik is, terugwerkend van 1 Desember 1969. Dit blyk ook dat tot en met Augustus 1971 die verweerder die totale bedrag van R6 504 922,95 aan eiser betaal het. Hiervan was 'n bedrag van R5 942 321,08 bereken teen pryse waarop oorspronklik ooreengekom is en 'n bedrag van R562 601,87 teen pryse waarop oorspronklik nie ooreengekom is nie.
In sy hoofeis het eiser die volgende beweer:
Rumpff Wn HR
During the course of the execution of work by the plaintiff in performance of its undertaking to construct the said road, the defendant so varied, altered and extended the work required as to amount to an abandonment of the original undertaking, plan or A scheme and/or a vitiation of the contract.
Notwithstanding the said abandonment the plaintiff continued to execute all work required by the defendant in terms of the said variations, alterations and extensions.
In the premises an agreement came into being between the parties, in terms of which the defendant became obliged to pay to the plaintiff a fair and reasonable B remuneration for all the work executed in the construction of the said road.
The plaintiff duly completed all work required by the defendant in terms of the said agreement."
Die gewysigde smeekbede lees soos volg:
C "Wherefore the plaintiff claims:
An order declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to be paid remuneration at a fair and reasonable rate for all work done by it or on its behalf or order in the construction of certain road between the Willows and Bronkhorstspruit."
Namens appellant is aangevoer dat die werk wat inderdaad weens die veranderings deur eiser gedoen is, nie die werk is waaroor die partye ooreengekom het nie, dat die kontrakpryse weens D sekere bepalings van die kontrak self opgehef is en dat eiser op 'n billike vergoeding geregtig is. 'n Opsomming van die veranderings waarop eiser staat maak is te vinde in skedule B wat soos volg lees:
"Schedule B.
E Principal variations, alterations and extensions of work.
Omission of 53 pipe culverts. |
} |
Along the Freeway alone. |
Hier benewens is ons ook verwys na sekere planne waarop grafies in kleure die wysigings op die padoppervlakte getoon word (bewysstukke 33A, 33B en 33C) en dreineerwerk wat nie oorspronklik beplan of gewysig is nie (bewysstukke 2A, 2B en 2C), en na skedule C, bevattende 'n
Rumpff Wn HR
lys van 256 memorandums of instruksies deur die ingenieur aan die eiser gegee en skedule D wat 'n lys van wysigings bevat met verwysing na die betrokke instruksies wat daarmee in verband staan. Omdat dit nodig is, ook wat die ander eise betref, om na A verskillende bepalings van die kontrak te verwys, sal ek op hierdie stadium die klousules noem wat m.i. van belang is by die beoordeling van die onderskeie smeekbedes. Wat die algemene kontrakvoorwaardes betref (bewysstuk 4B), bepaal klousule 1 (7) die volgende:
"'Drawings' means the plans, sections, elevations, or exact reproductions thereof, approved by the engineer and attached to B this contract, showing the location, character, dimensions and details of the work to be done, and also any working drawings, detail drawings or sketches supplied from time to time by the engineer for the guidance of the contractor."
Klousule 1 (10) lees:
"'Contract' means the general conditions of contract, the special provisions, the specification, the priced schedule of quantities, the drawings, the tender, the written agreement C between the employer and the contractor for the work to be done, and also any and all supplemental agreements varying, amending, extending or reducing the work contemplated and which may be required to complete the work in a substantial and acceptable manner."
Klousule 13 wat handel oor tekeninge bepaal in subklousule (3):
"The engineer shall have full power and authority to supply to the contractor from time to time during the progress of the works such further drawings and instructions as shall be D necessary for the purpose of the proper and adequate execution and maintenance of the words, and the contractor shall carry out and be bound by the same."
Klousule 15 handel oor die gesag van die ingenieur en die werkgewer en die eerste deel van klousule 15 (1) lees:
"The contractor shall execute, complete and maintain the works in strict accordance with the contract to the E satisfaction of the engineer. The work shall be carried out under the supervision of the engineer who shall decide any and all...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Botha (Now Griessel) and Another v Finanscredit (Pty) Ltd
...van Landbou-Tegniese Dienste v Scholtz 1971 (3) SA 188 (A); Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A); Van den Berg v Tenner 1975 (2) SA 268 (A); Resisto Dairy (Pty) Ltd v Auto C Protection Insurance Co Ltd 1963 (1) SA 632 (A); McWilliams v Fi......
-
Giving Practical Effect to Good Faith in the Law of Contract
...ory. If a party has a right, should it not by d enition be 94 See Alf red McAlpine & S on v Transvaal Prov incial Admini stration 1974 3 SA 506 (A) 532-533; Van Huyssteen et al Contract 272 , 276-277. Compare Art icle 5.1.2 of the UNIDROIT Pr inciples of Int ernatio nal Commercial C ontrac......
-
Wishart and Others v Blieden NO and Others
...words, in the distinctiondrawn between these by Corbett JA in Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd vTransvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A) at 531D–532G, theterm is one ‘imposed by the law from without’ rather than a tacit term whichis an ‘unexpressed provision of the contract wh......
-
Maphango and Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd
...(12) BCLR 1301; [2003] ZACC 18): dictum in para [43] applied I Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A): referred to Atlantis Diesel Engines (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of SA 1995 (3) SA 22 (A) ((1994) 15 ILJ 1247): referred to......
-
Botha (Now Griessel) and Another v Finanscredit (Pty) Ltd
...van Landbou-Tegniese Dienste v Scholtz 1971 (3) SA 188 (A); Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A); Van den Berg v Tenner 1975 (2) SA 268 (A); Resisto Dairy (Pty) Ltd v Auto C Protection Insurance Co Ltd 1963 (1) SA 632 (A); McWilliams v Fi......
-
Wishart and Others v Blieden NO and Others
...words, in the distinctiondrawn between these by Corbett JA in Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd vTransvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A) at 531D–532G, theterm is one ‘imposed by the law from without’ rather than a tacit term whichis an ‘unexpressed provision of the contract wh......
-
Maphango and Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd
...(12) BCLR 1301; [2003] ZACC 18): dictum in para [43] applied I Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A): referred to Atlantis Diesel Engines (Pty) Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of SA 1995 (3) SA 22 (A) ((1994) 15 ILJ 1247): referred to......
-
NBS Boland Bank Ltd v One Berg River Drive CC and Others; Deeb and Another v Absa Bank Ltd; Friedman v Standard Bank of SA Ltd
...Ltd v Johannesburg City Council 1995 (3) SA 827 (A) at 832D-833E Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A) at 525A, 531D-H, 532H-533B Bank of Scotland v Dunedin Property Investment Co Ltd 1998 SC 657 at 676 Barnabas Plein & Co v Sol Jacobson &......
-
It's Implied! Tacit Contractual Terms
...terms to a contract and how do they operate? In the case of Alfred McAlpine and Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A), a tacit term was referred to as an unexpressed provision of a contract, inferred by the court from the express terms of the contract and t......
-
Giving Practical Effect to Good Faith in the Law of Contract
...ory. If a party has a right, should it not by d enition be 94 See Alf red McAlpine & S on v Transvaal Prov incial Admini stration 1974 3 SA 506 (A) 532-533; Van Huyssteen et al Contract 272 , 276-277. Compare Art icle 5.1.2 of the UNIDROIT Pr inciples of Int ernatio nal Commercial C ontrac......
-
The Unexpressed Terms of a Contract
...a closer and more complete analysis of Salmond reveals thatin both the Scholtz and Alfred McAlpine cases, the courts had grossly2265.31974 3 SA 506 (A).4526D-F 532C-D.51971 3 SA 188 (A).6Principles of the Law of Contracts 2 ed (1945) 36.THE UNEXPRESSED TERMS OF A CONTRACT 495© Juta and Comp......
-
Trade Usage: Still Law Made by Merchants for Merchants?
...operate as termsimplied by law and when as tacit terms. See also Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v TransvaalProvincial Administration 1974 (3) SA 506 (A) at 531–532; Bredenkamp & others v StandardBank of South Africa Ltd 2010 (4) SA 468 (SCA) at 473 for the difference between tacit termsand......
-
Baker Tilly (a firm) v Makar [2010] EWCA Civ 1411 Tacit terms and the common unexpressed intention of the parties to a contract : recent case law
...(Minister van Landbou-Tegniese Dienste v Scholtz1971 3 SA 188 (A); Alfred McAlpine & Son (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal ProvincialAdministration 1974 3 SA 506 (A)). The way in which the English courtsdeal with the implication of terms can therefore also provide someinsight into our own law regarding......