Tag archives: Consumer Protection Act

Exemption clause enforceable in cases of liability arising from employee theft

Photo of Daniel BreierBy Daniel Breier on Posted in Insurance
An exemption clause which has the effect of excluding a party’s liability for theft by its employees is not contrary to public policy and is enforceable. This was the ruling of the Constitutional Court in Fujitsu Services Core (Pty) Limited v Schenker South Africa (Pty) Limited [2023] ZACC 20.  This issue divided the Court, with five judges … Continue reading

Disclaimer notices and the Consumer Protection Act

Photo of Donald DinnieBy Donald Dinnie on Posted in Insurance
In this case, the claimant fell at the entrance of the defendant’s restaurant premises.  The claimant sued alleging negligence on the part of the defendant. One of the issues for determination was whether the defendant was absolved of any liability by virtue of the disclaimer notice. The disclaimer notice read (in capital letters): “All persons … Continue reading

The Consumer Protection Act and exhaustion of remedies

Photo of Donald DinnieBy Donald Dinnie on Posted in General
This judgement considered whether section 69 of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), which provides that a person may not seek to enforce any right in terms of the CPA, or in terms of a transaction or agreement or otherwise to resolve a dispute by approaching the court with jurisdiction of the matter unless  “all other … Continue reading

Hospitality guest indemnity upheld under Consumer Protection Act

Financial Institutions Legal SnapshotBy NRF Digital Team on Posted in General
Author: James Donald, Candidate Attorney In an April 2021 judgement, the Eastern Cape high court held that a standard form guest indemnity used by a game reserve was not in conflict with applicable provisions in the Consumer Protection Act 2008 (the CPA). The plaintiff was a tourist to South Africa, on holiday at a local … Continue reading

Indemnity clauses and the Consumer Protection Act

Photo of Donald DinnieBy Donald Dinnie on Posted in Insurance
Indemnity clauses and the Consumer Protection Act In a recent Eastern Cape High Court judgment which you can read about here, the claimant fell into an unfenced pool at the game reserve and injured herself.  The court found in the evidence that the claimant’s conduct was the sole cause of her stepping into the pool and … Continue reading

Disclaimer notice at the entrance to a store

Photo of Hishaam KhanPhoto of Yash NaidooBy Hishaam Khan and Yash Naidoo on Posted in General
The High Court has refused to apply the terms of a disclaimer notice to defeat the claim of a shopper who tore his bicep while trying to stop a rack from falling. The shop owner’s defence relied on the display of a disclaimer notice alongside the entrance to the store which contained an exemption of … Continue reading

Disclaimers and the Consumer Protection Act

Photo of Donald DinnieBy Donald Dinnie on Posted in General
For the first time, a South African court in Van Wyk v UPS dealt with the application of the Consumer Protection Act to disclaimer clauses in a contract. On the facts, the court applied sections 22, 49 and 52 to sever from the agreement the specific clauses on which the defendant sought to escape liability … Continue reading

Medical prosthesis not defective nor abnormal risk (UK)

Photo of Patrick Bracher (ZA)By Patrick Bracher (ZA) on Posted in General
The manufacturer of a hip prosthesis system (which was of a metal-on-metal design) for use in total hip replacement operations was sued by 313 individual claimants who alleged metal-wear debris damaged surrounding soft tissues necessitating revision surgery. The court found that the system was not defective and the claimants had not proved that it did … Continue reading

Section 61 CPA liability only attaches to a supplier-consumer relationship

Photo of Candice GrievePhoto of Patrick Bracher (ZA)By Candice Grieve and Patrick Bracher (ZA) on Posted in General
A cyclist who suffered electrical burns after coming into contact with a low-hanging powerline had not entered into a transaction with Eskom, nor was he the beneficiary of the electricity supplied. There was no supplier-consumer relationship, as required for a product defect claim under s61(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 2008. This was the finding … Continue reading
LexBlog