IT CAN BE TRICKY TO PROVE AN ENRICHMENT LIEN
Davis and Another v Purple Fountain Properties 118 (Pty) Ltd (08/36380, 30457/15)  ZAGPJHC 198 (28 July 2016)
It is one thing for a developer installing basic infrastructure in a subdivision to allege that the owner’s property has been enriched and that he can exercise an enrichment lien over the property until he has been compensated, and another to prove actual expense in respect of a subdivided property. This judgment highlights how careful one must proceed with claiming possession of a property as a result of an enrichment lien.
SURETYSHIPS: A (HARSH) REALITY OF THE CREDIT INDUSTRY
Nedbank Limited v Antoniou (1150/00)  ZAECPEHC 30 (1 July 2016)
This judgment deals with a mother’s defences raised against a bank acting against her in terms of a suretyship she signed for her son’s substantial credit agreements with the bank. It highlights the reality that standing surety can sometimes come back and bite, and that unsubstantiated allegations of misrepresentation on the side of a bank cannot assist in escaping liability. Caveat subscriptor!