PVL3704 MQS (Q&A)

The following facts are relevant for questions 1-4: A has demanded payment from B of an amount of R 50,000 which he believes B is owing. B has checked his records and they indicate that A has already been paid by C, B’s book keeper. A threatens B with legal action and B pays A, but under protest, an amount of R 50,000. At the time of the cheque payment A's account was overdrawn in the amount of R 30,000 and was therefore in credit of R 20,000 after the payment. A has taken R 10,000 out of his account to have his car serviced. He has also gambled away R 10,000 after realising that his account was in credit. Question 1 Which statement best explains the nature of B’s claim against A? 1 B has an enrichment claim against A based on the condictio ob turpem vel iniustam causam. 2 B has an enrichment claim against A based on the condictio indebiti. 3 B has an enrichment claim against A based on the condictio causa data causa non secuta. 4 B has an enrichment claim against A based on the actio negotiorum gestorum contraria. 5 B has an enrichment claim against A based on the actio negotiorum gestorum utilis. (2) Question 2 Which statement is incorrect? 1 A has not been enriched at the expense of C, who made the payment. 2 A's enrichment is not unjustified as B made a donation to A. 3 A's enrichment is unjustified even though there was a contract between A and B. 4 A has not been impoverished when the bank debited an amount of R 30,000 from his account. 5 B has not been impoverished by the conduct of the bank. (2) Question 3 Which statement best explains the calculation of the enrichment claim? 1 B can only claim R 20,000 from A because his account was overdrawn and the bank received the benefit of the other R 30,000. 2 B can claim nothing from A as all the money has been used. 3 B can claim only R 30,000 because the rest of the enrichment amount has been spent on a car service and gambling. 4 B can claim only R 40,000 because the rest of the enrichment amount has been lost on a car service. 5 B can claim only R 40,000 because the rest of the enrichment amount has been lost on gambling. (2) PVL3704/201 Question 4 Which statement best explains the calculation of the enrichment claim if A had been unjustifiably enriched at the expense of B and had known it all along? 1 B can claim nothing from A as all the money has been used. 2 B can only claim R 20,000 from A because his account was overdrawn and the bank received the benefit of the other R 30,000. 3 B can claim only R 30,000 because the rest of the enrichment amount has been spent on a car service and gambling. 4 B can claim only R 40,000 because the rest of the enrichment amount has been lost on a car service. 5 B can claim R 50,000 even though some of the enrichment amount has been lost on gambling. (2) The following facts are relevant for questions 5-8: A buys B’s Mercedes Benz for R 200,000. B tells A during the negotiations that the car is in an excellent condition and that it has just been serviced. A pays B for the car with a cheque drawn on A’s bank - C Bank. B also banks with C Bank. A day after taking delivery of the car A finds that the gearbox is faulty. To repair the gearbox will cost R 30,000. Be refuses to pay for the repairs and states that A damaged the gearbox by towing a too heavy load with the car. A is unhappy and immediately instructs C Bank not pay the proceeds of the cheque out to B. Due to a clerical error C Bank nevertheless pays the R 200,000 out to B. Question 5 Which statement regarding impoverishment and enrichment is most correct? 1 A has been impoverished and B has been enriched. 2 B has been impoverished and A has been enriched. 3 C has been impoverished and A has been enriched. 4 C has been impoverished and B has been enriched. 5 C has been impoverished, but neither A nor B has been enriched. (2) Question 6 Assuming that there was impoverishment and enrichment in the circumstances, which would be the appropriate enrichment action to use in terms of case law? 1 The condictio sine causa. 2 The condictio indebiti. 3 The condictio causa data causa non secuta. 4 The condictio ob turpem vel iniustam causam. 5 The actio negotiorum gestorum contraria. (2) Question 7 PVL3704/201 Which statement regarding the outcome of a claim for enrichment is most correct? 1 A will be successful with an enrichment claim against B because B has been enriched at A’s expense. 2 B will be successful with an enrichment claim against A because A has been enriched at B’s expense. 3 C will not be successful with an enrichment claim against B because B has not been enriched: he has lost his contractual claim against A. 4 A will be successful with an enrichment claim against C because C has paid B contrary to A’s instruction. 5 None of the above. (2) Question 8 Which case would you refer to in substantiating your answer to Question 7? 1 First National Bank of SA Ltd v B & H Engineering 1993 (2) SA 41 (T). 2 B & H Engineering v First National Bank of SA Ltd 1995 (2) SA 279 (A). 3 Kommissaris van Binnelandse Inkomste v Willers 1994 (3) SA 283 (A). 4 Willis Faber Enthoven (Pty) Ltd v Receiver of Revenue 1992 (4) SA 202 (A). 5 Leeuw v First National Bank Ltd 2010 (3) SA 410 (SCA). (2) Question 9 Where a collecting bank pays out the proceeds of a cheque which has been dishonoured to its customer, what would be the appropriate enrichment action to claim return of the money from the customer? 1 The condictio sine causa. 2 The condictio indebiti. 3 The condictio causa data causa non secuta. 4 The condictio ob turpem vel iniustam causam. 5 The actio negotiorum gestorum contraria. (2) Question 10 Which case would you refer to in substantiating your answer to Question 9? 1 First National Bank of SA Ltd v B & H Engineering 1993 (2) SA 41 (T). 2 B & H Engineering v First National Bank of SA Ltd 1995 (2) SA 279 (A). 3 Kommissaris van Binnelandse Inkomste v Willers 1994 (3) SA 283 (A). 4 Willis Faber Enthoven (Pty) Ltd v Receiver of Revenue 1992 (4) SA 202 (A). 5 Leeuw v First National Bank Ltd 2010 (3) SA 410 (SCA). (2) PVL3704/201 Question 11 Which of the following are requirements for the true management of affairs action (actio negotiorum gestorum contraria)? (a) The gestor must act without instruction from the owner. (b) The actions of the gestor must be successful. (c) The gestor must have intended to act in the interests of the owner. (d) The gestor must not act against the express prohibition of the owner. (e) The gestor must have intended to act free of charge. 1 (a), (b) and (e). 2 (b), (d) and (e). 3 (a), (c) and (e). 4 (a), (c) and (d). 5 (a), (b), (c) and (e). (2) Question 12 A sells (and transfers) his house to his church for a very low price. The contract states that the church may only use the house for religious purposes. The church lets the house to a third party