Harrison v Harrison

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: De Wet J, and Holmes J
• Judgment Date: 30 April 1952
• Hearing Date: 25 April 1952
• Court: Natal Provincial Division

De Wet, J.:

The plaintiff has instituted an action against the defendant. The material portions of the plaintiff's declaration are as follows:

'(1)

The plaintiff is Leslie Logan Harrison, presently of Ladysmith, Natal, hotelkeeper.

De Wet J

(2)

The defendant is Johanna Margaretha Harrison (born van der Linde), of Cambrian Hotel & Bottle Store (Pty.) Ltd., of Dannhauser, Natal, the wife of the plaintiff.

(3)

On the 14th June, 1950, this Honourable Court granted to the defendant a decree of judicial separation a mensa et thoro and ordered a division of the community estate then subsisting between the plaintiff and the defendant.

(4)

A The plaintiff and the defendant during January, 1951, in correspondence conducted through their attorneys agreed to divide the joint estate as follows:

(a)

The plaintiff was to deliver to and place the defendant in full control and possession of the entire assets of and the licences B in connection with the business conducted at Dannhauser, Natal, by the duly registered proprietary company known as Cambrian Hotel & Bottle Store (Pty.), Ltd.

(b)

The agreed manner whereby the plaintiff was to do this was by transferring to the defendant all the plaintiff's shares, both C owned and controlled by him, in the said company, and representing the plaintiff's controlling interest in the said company, and also by transferring to the defendant as the company's nominee such liquor licences and other licence privileges as were held by the plaintiff in connection with the company's business.

(c)

The defendant was in return to pay the plaintiff the sum of £7,000 D in the manner hereinafter referred to, and as security for the performance of the said obligation, the defendant agreed to exercise or use the controlling shareholding which was to be transferred to her by the plaintiff in such a manner as immediately on transfer of the plaintiff's shares to her to do all things necessary to secure the passing and registration in favour of the E plaintiff of a second mortgage bond for £7,000 by the said company over its immovable property, the sum of £7,000 secured by the bond to be payable to the plaintiff by the company within five years of the delivery to the defendant of the shareholding referred to in sub-para. (b) hereof, should the defendant herself fail to so pay.

(d)

F The said second mortgage bond was also to provide security for the payment of interest at 5 per cent on the capital sum of £7,000 by the defendant from the date of delivery referred to in sub-para. (c), and was further to provide for repayment of the capital sum at the option of the principal debtor, the defendant, at any time G within the five years' period by sums in multiples of £100 on the giving of thirty days' notice of intention to do so.

(e)

The defendant was further to pay to the plaintiff within 60 days of the delivery to the defendant of the plaintiff's shareholding in the company a sum equal to the cost price of the liquor stocks of the company's said business, the cost to be reckoned at the place of the business and as those stocks stood on the 28th February, 1951.

(f)

H The plaintiff was to retain as his property a certain Studebaker motor van, and the defendant to retain as her property a Ford motor-car.

(5)

The cost price of the liquor stocks of the said company reckoned at its place of business, and as the stocks stood on the 28th February, 1951, is £1,519 14s. 3d.

(6)

The plaintiff has duly delivered to and...