Klug and Klug v Perkin 1932 CPD 402

Klug and Klug v Perkin 1932 CPD 402

Issue: Whether a person who has been enriched by the wrongful act of another person is liable to return the enrichment to the person who has been wronged, even if the person who has been enriched was not aware of the wrongful act.

Facts:

Klug and Klug, a partnership, was the owner of a farm. Perkin, a person, entered into a lease agreement with Klug and Klug to lease the farm. Perkin used the farm to graze his cattle.

Perkin was unaware that the farm was subject to a servitude that allowed a third party, Mr. Jones, to graze his cattle on the farm. Mr. Jones exercised his right to graze his cattle on the farm, which reduced the amount of grazing land available to Perkin's cattle.

Perkin suffered financial losses as a result of the reduction in grazing land available to his cattle. Perkin then sued Klug and Klug for damages.

Held:

The Court held that Klug and Klug were liable to pay Perkin damages. The Court reasoned that Klug and Klug had been enriched by the wrongful act of leasing the farm to Perkin without informing Perkin of the servitude. The court also found that it was irrelevant that Klug and Klug were not aware of the servitude.

Key Facts:

• A partnership leased a farm to a person.
• The farm was subject to a servitude that allowed a third party to graze their cattle on the farm.
• The person was unaware of the servitude.
• The third party exercised their right to graze their cattle on the farm, which reduced the amount of grazing land available to the person's cattle.
• The person suffered financial losses as a result of the reduction in grazing land available to his cattle.
• The person sued the partnership for damages.

Reasons:

• The Court held that the partnership was liable to pay the person damages because the partnership had been enriched by the wrongful act of leasing the farm to the person without informing the person of the servitude.
• The court also found that it was irrelevant that the partnership was not aware of the servitude.

Conclusion:

The Court's decision in Klug and Klug v Perkin 1932 CPD 402 is a significant case in South African law. The Court's decision clarified the law relating to the liability of persons who have been enriched by the wrongful act of another person.