Baker v Probert 1985 (3) SA 429 (A)

 Baker v Probert 1985 (3) SA 429 (A)

Issue: Whether a purchaser of a shareblock in a company made payment to the seller's agent in anticipation of the transfer thereof by the seller, and the seller failed to deliver the share certificates, whether the purchaser can cancel the contract on the ground of the Defendant's breach and recover the purchase price.

Facts:

In 1983, Baker agreed to purchase a shareblock in a company from Probert. The agreement was signed by Baker's agent, but not by Baker himself, as required by Section 4(1) of the Hire-Purchase Act, No. 36 of 1942.

Baker paid the full purchase price for the shareblock but later claimed that the contract was invalid due to non-compliance with Section 4(1) of the Hire-Purchase Act and demanded a refund of the money paid.

Probert refused to refund the money, arguing that Baker had received the benefit of the contract, even though the contract was invalid.

Held:

The Court held that Baker was entitled to a refund of the money paid. The Court reasoned that Baker had not received the benefit of the contract, as the share certificates had not been transferred to him.

The court also found that Baker had not changed his position in reliance on the invalid contract.

Key Facts:

• A purchaser agreed to purchase a shareblock in a company from a seller.
• The agreement was signed by the purchaser's agent, but not by the purchaser himself, as required by Section 4(1) of the Hire-Purchase Act, No. 36 of 1942.
• The purchaser paid the full purchase price for the shareblock but later claimed that the contract was invalid due to non-compliance with Section 4(1) of the Hire-Purchase Act and demanded a refund of the money paid.
• The seller refused to refund the money, arguing that the purchaser had received the benefit of the contract, even though the contract was invalid.

Reasons:

• The Court held that the purchaser was entitled to a refund of the money paid.
• The Court reasoned that the purchaser had not received the benefit of the contract, as the share certificates had not been transferred to him.
• The court also found that the purchaser had not changed his position in reliance on the invalid contract.

Conclusion:

The Court's decision in Baker v Probert 1985 (3) SA 429 (A) is a significant case in South African law. The Court's decision clarified the law relating to the rights of purchasers of goods under invalid contracts.