SALE SUBJECT TO “SUCCESSFUL SALE” OF PURCHASER’S HOME: WHAT DOES THIS MEAN AND MORE
Terry and Another v Solfafa and Others (2263/2019)  ZAFSHC 143 (29 August 2019)
This is an interesting judgment that combines many grounds often raised by sellers as a way to escape the consequences of having accepted an offer to purchase: from the argument that it was not signed by both spouses in a marriage in community of property, to the argument that the suspensive condition relating to the ‘successful sale’ of the purchaser’s property actually required ‘registration of transfer’ of such property. The judgment provides a valuable reminder of the law’s application to different factual scenarios. The Judgment can be viewed here.
PRESCRIPTION PERIOD FOR MORTGAGE DEBT AFTER THE BOND CANCELLED: DOES IT CHANGE FROM 30 TO 3 YEARS?
Botha v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd (445/2018)  ZASCA 108 (6 September 2019)
This matter relates to a claim against a surety for the shortfall of a debt secured by a mortgage bond over the surety’s husband’s immovable property. His estate was subsequently sequestrated, the bonds cancelled and the property sold to a third party. The surety contended that once the bonds were cancelled the debt was no longer secured by a mortgage bond, and the bank could therefore not rely on the 30-year period of prescription applicable to such debts. The question raised was thus whether the cancellation of a mortgage bond, after the debt has become due and prescription has begun to run against it, has the effect of changing the prescription period of the debt from 30 years to 3 years. The Judgment can be viewed here.