Distillers Corporation Ltd v Modise

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Citation: 2001 (4) SA 1071 (O)

Distillers Corporation Ltd v Modise
2001 (4) SA 1071 (O)

2001 (4) SA p1071

Citation	2001 (4) SA 1071 (O)
Case No	1983/99
Court	Oranje-Vrystaatse Provinsiale Afdeling
Judge	Van Coppehagen R
Heard	February 6, 2001; February 7, 2001
Judgment	February 15, 2001
Counsel	P J Jooste namens die eiser.; C J Horn namens die verweerder.

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde B

Man en vrou — Vermoënsregte — Huwelik in gemeenskap van goedere — Bepaling in art 15(2) van Wet op Huweliksgoedere 88 van 1984 dat sekere transaksies deur gade aangegaan skriftelike toestemming van ander gade vereis — Bepaling in art 15(9)(a) van Wet dat ander gade geag word skriftelike toe te gestem het, indien persoon wat transaksie aangaan 'nie weet en redelikerwys kan weet . . . nie' C dat transaksie in stryd met art 15(2) aangegaan word — Betekenis van 'nie . . . redelikerwys kan weet nie' — Aangeleentheid oorweeg te word uit oogpunt van redelike man — Gade in gemeenskap van goedere getroud verly borgakte sonder skriftelike toestemming van ander gade, soos vereis deur art 15(2)(h) — Akte bevat verklaring dat borg 'regtens bevoeg is om dit te verly' — Redelike man in posisie van D skuldeiser geregtig om te aanvaar, op grond van verklaring, dat borg inderdaad skriftelike toestemming van gade het om akte te verly — Skriftelike toestemming geag gegee te gewees het ingevolge art 15(9)(a).

Headnote : Kopnota

Artikel 15(2)(h) van die Wet op Huweliksgoedere 88 van 1984 bepaal ten aansien van gades in 'n huwelik in gemeenskap van E goedere soos volg: 'So 'n gade mag nie sonder die skriftelike toestemming van die ander gade . . . (h) hom as borg verbind nie.'

Artikel 15(9)(a) van die Wet bepaal soos volg: 'Wanneer 'n gade in stryd met die bepalings van subart (2) of (3) van hierdie artikel . . . 'n transaksie met 'n persoon aangaan en - (a) die persoon nie weet en redelikerwys kan F weet dat die transaksie in stryd met daardie bepalings . . . aangegaan word nie, word daar geag dat die betrokke transaksie aangegaan is met die toestemming wat ingevolge genoemde subart (2) . . .vereis word, . . . .'

Die vereiste, in art 15(9)(a), dat 'n persoon met wie 'n gade 'n transaksie aangaan nie 'redelikerwys kan weet' dat die transaksie in stryd met art 15(2) aangegaan word nie, impliseer dat die aangeleentheid oorweeg moet word soos wat die redelike man dit sal G doen, en dat tot die gevolgtrekking gekom moet word waartoe die redelike man sou geraak het. Waar iemand wat binne gemeenskap van goedere getroud is sonder die skriftelike toestemming van sy gade 'n borgakte onderteken, nadat hy dit deurgelees het en sonder dat hy ten aansien daarvan deur die skuldeiser mislei is, en daar verskyn in die borgakte 'n klousule waarin die borg verklaar dat hy 'regtens bevoeg H is om dit te verly', sal 'n redelike man in die posisie van die skuldeiser aanvaar dat die borg bewus is van die implikasies van sy verklaring (naamlik dat hy sy gade se skriftelike toestemming het om hom as borg te bind), en sal hy daarop staatmaak as 'n feitelike korrekte posisie. In so 'n geval, dus, moet ingevolge art 15(9)(a) geag word dat die borgstelling aangegaan is met die skriftelike toestemming van die borg se gade. Paragrawe [5] op 1075H/I - I en [8] en [9] op 1077E/F - I(geparafraseer.) I

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Husband and wife — Proprietary rights — Marriage in community of property — Provision in s 15(2) of Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 that certain transactions J

2001 (4) SA p1072

entered into by spouse requiring written consent of other spouse — Provision in s 15(9)(a) of Act A that other spouse deemed to have given written consent, if person entering into transaction 'does not know and cannot reasonably know' that transaction being entered into contrary to s 15(2) — Meaning of 'cannot reasonably know' — Matter to be considered from point of view of reasonable man — Spouse married in community of property executing deed of suretyship, without written consent of other spouse as required B by s 15(2)(h) — Deed containing statement that surety 'legally competent to execute it' — Reasonable man in position of creditor entitled to accept, on basis of statement, that surety in fact having written consent of spouse to execute deed — Written consent deemed to have been given in terms of s 15(9)(a).

Contract — Legality — Contracts contrary to statute — Provision in s 15(2) of Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 that certain transactions entered into by spouse married in community of property requiring written consent of other spouse — Provision in s 15(9)(a) of Act that other spouse deemed to have given written consent, if person entering into transaction `does not know and cannot reasonably know' that transaction being entered into contrary to s 15(2) — Meaning of `cannot reasonably know' — Matter to be considered from point of view of reasonable man — Spouse married in community of property executing deed of suretyship, without written consent of other spouse as required by s 15(2)(h) — Deed containing statement that surety `legally competent to execute it' — Reasonable man in position of creditor entitled to accept, on basis of statement, that surety in fact having written consent of spouse to execute deed — Written consent deemed to have been given in terms of s 15(9)(a).

Principal and surety — Deed of suretyship — Validity of — Provision in s 15(2) of Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 that certain transactions entered into by spouse married in community of property requiring written consent of other spouse — Provision in s 15(9)(a) of Act that other spouse deemed to have given written consent, if person entering into transaction `does not know and cannot reasonably know' that transaction being entered into contrary to s 15(2) — Meaning of `cannot reasonably know' — Matter to be considered from point of view of reasonable man — Spouse married in community of property executing deed of suretyship, without written consent of other spouse as required by s 15(2)(h) — Deed containing statement that surety `legally competent to execute it' — Reasonable man in position of creditor entitled to accept, on basis of statement, that surety in fact having written consent of spouse to execute deed — Written consent deemed to have been given in terms of s 15(9)(a).

Headnote : Kopnota

Section 15(2)(h) of the Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 provides as follows in respect of spouses who are married in C community of property: 'Such a spouse shall not without the written consent of the other spouse . . . (h) bind himself as surety.'

Section 15(9)(a) of the Act provides as follows: 'When a spouse enters into a transaction with a person contrary to the provisions of ss (2) . . . of this section . . . and - (a) that person does not know and cannot reasonably know that the transaction is being entered into D contrary to those provisions . . . it is deemed that the transaction concerned has been entered into with the consent required in terms of the said ss (2). . . .'

The requirement, in s 15(9)(a), that a person with whom the spouse enters into a transaction 'cannot reasonably know' that the...