Van Jaarsveld v Bridges Case Study
40 Questions
3 Views

Van Jaarsveld v Bridges Case Study

Created by
@HandsDownZeugma

Podcast Beta

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What did Harms DP say about the traditional views on engagements?

  • They are still relevant today.
  • They require court intervention.
  • They should be strictly enforced.
  • They are outdated and do not recognize current mores. (correct)

    • The action for breach of promise is still legally recognized in England.

    False

    What are sponsorship gifts made with the view to marriage called?

    sponsolatia largitas

    In an engagement, the _____ is an example of a gift that shows the seriousness of the promise.

    <p>arrhae sponsolatiae</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the types of gifts related to engagement with their definitions:

    <p>Sponsolatia largitas = Gifts made with a view to marriage Arrhae sponsolatiae = Gifts symbolizing seriousness of the promise Inconsequential gifts = Gifts with no specific meaning that have been used or lost</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Under what condition must gifts be returned if the engagement is terminated by mutual agreement?

    <p>Both sponsolatia largitas and arrhae sponsolatiae</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The innocent party in a breach of engagement can claim both types of gifts given to the guilty party.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    If the innocent party claims damages, the value of the gifts must be set off against the _____ claimed.

    <p>damages</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following is considered material misrepresentation in an engagement?

    <p>False claims regarding mental illness</p> Signup and view all the answers

    An engagement can be voidable due to material misrepresentation regardless of intent.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What are the two ways misrepresentation can occur?

    <p>Positive action of making a false statement or failure to remove a misconception.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Persons that cannot enter into a valid engagement include minors, mentally ill persons, and those who are too closely _________ .

    <p>related</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is required for minors to have a binding engagement?

    <p>Parental permission and ministerial consent</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following terms with their definitions:

    <p>Material misrepresentation = False statements seriously impacting the decision Parental consent = Permission required for minors to engage Ministerial consent = Approval from government authority for minors Ratification = Confirmation of the engagement by a party after reaching legal age</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A person who is married can enter into a valid engagement with someone else.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the case of Schnaar v Jansen, what was the court's ruling regarding non-disclosure of family details?

    <p>It was not grounds for setting aside the engagement.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What happens if parents withdraw their consent to a minor's engagement before the marriage?

    <p>The engagement is automatically terminated.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    An emancipated minor does not require parental consent to get married.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What type of promise is considered void due to public policy?

    <p>A promise by a married person to marry after obtaining a divorce or after their spouse’s death.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    An engagement is only void if the condition is in direct conflict with the very nature of marriage, for example, if the woman is required to __________.

    <p>prostitute herself</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What constitutes a breach of promise during an engagement?

    <p>Refusing to marry on the agreed date without just cause.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following conditions regarding engagements:

    <p>Prohibited degrees of relationship = Must not be related Under the age of puberty = Marriage is not allowed Emancipated minors = No parental consent required Married person promises = Is void as against public policy</p> Signup and view all the answers

    An engagement gives the parties the right to claim physical intimacy or sexual intercourse.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In what situation can a minor's parents not conclude an engagement on behalf of their child?

    <p>When the minor child does not give consent.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following reasons can lead to breaking off an engagement?

    <p>All of the above</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The courts can enforce specific performance for a contract of engagement.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must the innocent party prove to succeed in an action based on breach of contract?

    <p>Patrimonial loss</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The innocent party may claim __________ for injury to honor, dignity, and reputation.

    <p>satisfaction</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following legal concepts with their definitions:

    <p>Breach of Contract = Claims for expenses incurred for intended marriage Actio iniuriarum = Claims for injury to honor and dignity Patrimonial Damages = Financial losses due to breach Non-patrimonial Loss = Emotional suffering resulting from a breach</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The case of Van Jaarsveld v Bridges highlighted concerns about which aspect of engagements?

    <p>Outdated traditional views</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What are the two distinct causes of action arising from breach of promise to marry?

    <p>Breach of contract and Actio iniuriarum</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Patrimonial damages can only be claimed through the Actio Legis Aquiliae.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    According to the court in Van Jaarsveld v Bridges, which of the following factors is NOT considered when assessing if the manner of breaking off an engagement was insulting?

    <p>The financial status of the parties</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A party can claim damages for satisfaction if they realize after an engagement that they no longer love the other party.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the general purpose of an engagement according to the content?

    <p>To discover if the parties can pursue a relationship that will result in a successful marriage.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A plaintiff can claim for _______ if they were unaware that the other party was married during the engagement.

    <p>contumelia</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the cases with their outcomes regarding engagements and claims:

    <p>Davel v Swanepoel = Court ruling on emotional damages Smit v Jacobs = Recognized damages for humiliating break-up Guggenheim v Rosenbaum = Addressed engagement disputes Viljoen v Viljoen = Claim for insult when unaware of marriage</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What does the court assess to determine if a break-up was humiliating?

    <p>The social status of the parties</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The court can compute the amount of damages for emotional distress with mathematical precision.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In what scenario would a party be unable to claim damages for an engagement breach?

    <p>If the party knew the other was married.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Study Notes

    Van Jaarsveld v Bridges Case

    • Harms DP criticized outdated views on engagements, stating that courts must consider modern social mores and public policy.
    • The unwillingness to marry signifies a breakdown in engagement; thus, consequences of breaking an engagement should align with those of marriage.
    • The English Law Commission's 1969 report led to the abolition of breach of promise actions, emphasizing marriage stability.

    Return of Engagement Gifts

    • Sponsolatia largitas: Gifts intended for future marital use, such as household appliances.
    • Arrhae sponsolatiae: Gifts symbolizing commitment, typically engagement rings.
    • Inconsequential gifts: Tokens of affection without significant meaning, e.g., flowers or chocolates.

    Termination of Engagement

    • Upon mutual agreement to terminate, both sponsolatia largitas and arrhae sponsolatiae must be returned; inconsequential gifts need not be returned.
    • If a breach of promise occurs, the innocent party may reclaim gifts given to the guilty party, retain gifts received, or seek damages.

    Material Misrepresentation

    • Material misrepresentation can void an engagement, particularly when it impacts the potential for a happy marriage.
    • Examples include false claims about health or mental condition; non-disclosure of virginity is not grounds for repudiation.

    Capacity to Engage

    • Valid engagements require both parties to have capacity:
      • Not too closely related.
      • Not currently married.
      • Mentally competent.
      • Minors need parental permission, with specific age-related conditions applied.

    Lawfulness of Engagement

    • Both parties must be unmarried for a valid engagement; promises by married individuals are void due to public policy.

    Possibility of Performance

    • Couples must have the ability to marry; certain restrictions apply to relationships and age.
    • Once a marriage date is set, refusal to marry without just cause constitutes a breach of promise.

    Reasons for Breaking Engagement

    • Common legitimate reasons include loss of affection or change of heart.
    • Breach of promise may entail contractual and delictual liability for damages.

    Damages for Breach of Engagement

    • Claims may include positive interest damages, which aim to place the innocent party in the position they would have been if no breach occurred.
    • Emotional damages cover injuries to feelings, pride, and reputation, assessed based on the manner of engagement termination.

    Case Law on Engagement and Breach

    • Courts evaluate the context of engagement terminations, considering the social status and norms influencing perceptions of insult and humiliation.
    • Various cases highlight the discrete nature of claims arising from a breach of promise.

    Reconsideration of Damages

    • The essence of engagements is to determine marital compatibility; therefore, avoiding a likely failed marriage should not lead to punitive consequences.
    • Engagement is viewed uniquely compared to marriage, as divorce can occur without fault, the legal system's expectations should be consistent.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Related Documents

    CH 4 THE ENGAGEMENT .pdf

    Description

    Explore the significant legal principles established in the Van Jaarsveld v Bridges case, particularly regarding engagement, its dissolution, and the return of gifts. This study emphasizes the shift in legal attitudes towards engagements in light of modern societal values and the implications for gift-giving upon engagement termination.

    More Like This

    Validity Requirement for Marriage
    19 questions

    Validity Requirement for Marriage

    LucrativeToucan avatar
    LucrativeToucan
    Enhancing Law Enforcement Techniques Quiz
    10 questions

    Enhancing Law Enforcement Techniques Quiz

    BestPointillism avatar
    BestPointillism
    Article 18: Engagement of Football Agents
    12 questions

    Article 18: Engagement of Football Agents

    SharpestBlackberryBush avatar
    SharpestBlackberryBush
    Family Law Engagement Contracts
    5 questions

    Family Law Engagement Contracts

    HandsDownZeugma avatar
    HandsDownZeugma
    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Open
    Browser
    Browser