Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

Grand Mines (Pty) Ltd v Giddey No. (183/97) [1998] ZASCA 99

Country/Territory
South Africa
Type of court
National - higher court
Date
Oct 23, 1998
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
Supreme Court of Appeal
Seat of court
Bloemfontain
Judge
Schutz W. P.
Reference number
No. 183/97
Subject
Mineral resources, Legal questions
Abstract

This case concerns a contract between two parties.  The exceptio non adimpleti contractus requires that obligations under the contract be reciprocal.

This would mean that non-performance by one party would allow for the non-performance of another. Therefore, when Grand Mines paid for the coal did Bercon have an obligation to rehabilitate the mine?

It was found that the obligations were not reciprocal as what the parties had contracted was clear in the terms of their agreement.

The appeal brought by Grand Mines was dismissed.

Full text
Grand Mines (Pty) Ltd v Giddey NO (183 97) [1998] ZASCA 99.pdf
99.pdf
Website
www.saflii.org