Browsing by Author "Watt, Ilze Jr"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemThe consequences of contracts concluded by unassisted minors : a comparative evaluation(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2012-12) Watt, Ilze Jr; Du Plessis, Jacques; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Private Law.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: It is a general principle of the law of South Africa that an unassisted contract of a minor is unenforceable against the minor. Although it binds the other party, the minor is not bound. The minor will only be bound if the contract is enforced by his guardian, or if the contract is ratified by the child after attaining majority. This implies that the other party is in a rather unfortunate position, since the effectiveness of the contract will remain uncertain until the guardian of the minor decides to enforce or repudiate the contract, or until the minor ratifies it after attaining majority. The other party may not resile from the contract during this interim period. Should it be established that the contract has failed, the question arises to what extent the parties are obliged to return performances made in purported fulfilment of the contract. In terms of the law of South Africa, the prevailing view is that these claims are based on unjustified enrichment. However, the extent of these claims differs. In principle, both parties’ liability will be limited to the amount remaining in its estate, according to the defence of loss of enrichment. But the application of the defence is subject to an exception that does not apply equally to the parties. Had the other party known or should the other party have known that the enrichment was sine causa, yet continued to part with it, he will be held liable for the full enrichment. However, this exception does not apply to the enrichment liability of minors. In other words, whether the minor knew or should have known that the enrichment was sine causa, he would still be allowed to raise the defence of loss of enrichment. Furthermore, the rules applicable to minors’ enrichment liability applies to all minors, and no scope is left to consider the specific circumstances of each minor. It is accepted that there are two competing principles relating to minors’ unassisted contracts. On the one hand, the law must protect the minor from his immaturity and lack of experience. On the other hand, the law must protect the interests of the other party. It will be seen throughout this study that the determination of how to balance these competing principles is not an easy task. The key aim of this thesis is to investigate the principles governing the unwinding of unassisted minors’ contracts in South Africa. A comparison will be made with the principles applied in other legal systems, in order to identify similarities and differences in the approaches and, to establish what underlies the differences in the various approaches. Germany, England and Scotland have been chosen for comparison for various reasons. First, they share some historical roots, and they represent three major legal traditions, namely the civil law, common law and mixed legal systems, of which South Africa also forms part. Secondly, both England and Scotland have experienced recent legislative reform in this regard, which implies that their respective legal systems should be in line with modern tendencies, and consequently they may provide a valuable framework for possible reform in South Africa. In Germany, although mainly regulated by rather older legislation, there have been interesting developments in the determination of consequences of failed contracts. Hellwege has argued that the unwinding of all contracts should be treated similarly, regardless of the unwinding factor. He has also suggested that in order to prevent the accumulation of risk on one party, and to ensure that the risk is placed on the person who is in control of the object, the defence of loss of enrichment should not be available to any party. His reasoning and suggestions is dealt with in more detail in this thesis. This study argues that the current strict approach applied under South African law regarding minors’ unassisted contracts needs to be re-considered. The current approach is dated and is not in line with modern tendencies and legislation. No proper consideration is given to minors’ development into adulthood or personal circumstances of the parties. It is submitted that in the process of re-consideration, some form of acknowledgement must be given to minors’ development towards mature adults. It is submitted that this would be possible by introducing a more flexible approach to regulate the enforceability and unwinding of minors’ unassisted contracts.