Podcast
Questions and Answers
A contract is considered illegal if its object is contra bonos mores.
True
In Roman law, if both parties are in turpitudo, the plaintiff can still make a claim.
False
According to South African law, a plaintiff does not need to return what they received if the defendant would have been precluded from claiming due to the par delictum rule.
True
In Roman-Dutch law, the par delictum rule is applied more leniently compared to South African law.
Signup and view all the answers
A plaintiff who is a turpis persona cannot claim for property delivered under an illegal agreement.
Signup and view all the answers
A person can reclaim payment made under a mistaken belief that the payment was owed.
Signup and view all the answers
Under SA Law, no debt at the time of payment means that the payment can be reclaimed without any conditions.
Signup and view all the answers
A mala fide receiver is held liable for all damages and interest on received monies.
Signup and view all the answers
Mala fide receivers can be held liable for fruits that they could have gathered but did not.
Signup and view all the answers
In Roman-Dutch Law, payments made due to mistake of law can be recovered.
Signup and view all the answers
To prove a condictio indebiti, the party must demonstrate that the mistake was unreasonable.
Signup and view all the answers
The requirement of proving that value of factum can be reclaimed is part of the conditions for payment made under protest.
Signup and view all the answers
Interest accrued on money payment can always be reclaimed regardless of the circumstances.
Signup and view all the answers
An owner of an immovable can recover materials used to build on their land only if severed.
Signup and view all the answers
A bona fide possessor can institute an action for everyday repairs under Roman-Dutch Law.
Signup and view all the answers
The right of repudiation allows a party to rescind a claim after counter-performance.
Signup and view all the answers
Under Roman Law, a bona fide possessor can use the condictio sine causa specialis to assert a claim.
Signup and view all the answers
In Roman-Dutch law, contracts are considered real and require formalities to be valid.
Signup and view all the answers
Mala fide possessors have the right to vindicate their materials after severance.
Signup and view all the answers
A resolutive condition permits the return of an object to the original owner if fulfilled.
Signup and view all the answers
In South African Law, a bona fide possessor loses ownership through accession.
Signup and view all the answers
In case of unjustified enrichment, the original owner retains the right to ownership.
Signup and view all the answers
Interest is not due on unrecovered money in Roman law.
Signup and view all the answers
In the context of improvements, defendants are entitled to compensation for luxury enhancements.
Signup and view all the answers
Lessees can remove necessary improvements without consent from the lessor.
Signup and view all the answers
A claim for impensae voluptuariae under Roman-Dutch Law is not possible if the removal of fixtures damages the land.
Signup and view all the answers
A suspensive condition means that the condition has not yet been fulfilled.
Signup and view all the answers
No claim can be made to recover the value of a factum in SA law.
Signup and view all the answers
Under Roman Law, the owner of the main article acquires ownership upon its detachment.
Signup and view all the answers
Cancellation of a contract can occur without a breach by one party in Roman-Dutch law.
Signup and view all the answers
A building constructed on a landowner's property using their materials can be reclaimed by the builder without any compensation.
Signup and view all the answers
Only the condictio sine causa specialis applies in Roman law when certain conditions do not exist.
Signup and view all the answers
In South African law, a countermanded cheque can be seen as a case of ownership being transferred sine causa.
Signup and view all the answers
Under Roman-Dutch law, the negotium requirement completely disappears in the context of condictio sine causa.
Signup and view all the answers
The general condictio can be used only if one of the three previous conditions has been instituted.
Signup and view all the answers
In the case of a bona fide possessor, they can only claim profit from the original owner.
Signup and view all the answers
In Roman Law, the dominus is not obligated to compensate the gestor for expenses.
Signup and view all the answers
Roman-Dutch Law allows a gestor to be compensated even if their actions go against a dominus's prohibition.
Signup and view all the answers
Under South African Law, a gestor must act in a reasonable manner without the intention of making a gift.
Signup and view all the answers
In the context of negotiorum gestio, a gestor recovers all reasonable expenses at the time of the improvement.
Signup and view all the answers
In Roman-Dutch law, a third party can benefit from enriching the dominus directly.
Signup and view all the answers
Compensation for enrichment is affected by the fact that the improvement has been destroyed or diminished in value.
Signup and view all the answers
A gestor under SA Law is allowed to act without the intent to benefit the dominus.
Signup and view all the answers
Negotiorum gestio remains unaffected by whether the improvement was destroyed or diminished in value.
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Contract Illegal
- Agreement void owing to illegality of agreement
- In terms of common law subject matter of contract, its object or conclusion is contra bonos mores
- Prohibited expressly or by necessary implication by statute
- Objective criterion
Roman Law
- A pays B money in terms of invalid transaction. A could claim
- Requirements:
- Transfer of property i.t.o. illegal agreement (prohibited by law)
- Plaintiff himself not a turpis persona (shameful)
- If both parties in turpitud0 – no claim, since the par delicum rule – later relaxed. Could claim if conduct's less disgraceful than defendant's.
- Claim:
- Property delivered + fixtures + fruits minus necessariae + impensa utiles
- Right to remove impensae voluptariae
- Interest drawn not reclaimed
- Value of facutm not claimed
- Undeveloped
Roman-Dutch Law
- No essential difference
- Par delicum rule strictly applied
SA Law
- No causa because underlying agreement is void.
- Requirements:
- Perform i.t.o. illegal agreement
- Other party enriched (who was impoverished)
- Tender performance made to return plaintiff
- Plaintiff not turpis persona or good reason not to apply par delicum rule strictly.
- Turpis persona – tested subjectively. Actual knowledge of illegality required.
- Plaintiff need not tender to return what he received if defendant would have been precluded from claiming by the par delicum rule.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
Explore the principles of contract law regarding agreements rendered void due to illegality. This quiz covers aspects from common law, Roman law, and South African law, providing a comprehensive overview of how illegality affects contractual obligations and claims.
