Suspensive conditions revisited in the Cape Royal case

South Africa’s law of contract provides several ways in which contracting parties can protect and enforce their contractual rights. The most essential principle of contract is party autonomy – parties to a contract are free to conclude what they have agreed to, and the courts have a duty to enforce this agreement as far as possible provided it is not against the law.

Buying Property On Auction | Property Blog Articles

In the sale of immovable property, the contract (commonly known as an Offer to Purchase) will have common and special terms designed to ensure that the agreement is fulfilled. 

Not everyone can afford to pay for an immovable property in cash, and in these cases the buyer will need to apply for a home loan from a bank. When it comes to a bond application, there is no guarantee that the loan will be granted by the bank. For the seller, the sale therefore remains uncertain until the loan is approved. To mitigate this risk and uncertainty, it’s become common practice for contracting parties to include a suspensive condition clause into their original contract.  

As a general rule, a suspensive condition creates an obligation – i.e. the fulfillment of a specific future event, upon which application of the contract will continue. In the sale of immovable property, the effect of the suspensive condition is that:  

  • The agreement is suspended until such time as the bank loan is obtained.
  • If the debtor fails to obtain a bank loan by the specified date, the sale agreement (subject to any contractual extensions) becomes null and void from its inception.

The Cape Royal case

What if the wording of the condition precedent does not reflect its nature? Can a party to a contract unilaterally waive performance of the condition? In the case of Noel Patrick McGrane and Cape Royal, the parties entered into an agreement of sale that included a condition precedent that the buyer obtain a bond in order to continue with the sale agreement. The buyer later paid in cash and therefore did not fulfill this condition’s requirements. This resulted in the seller repudiating the contract on the grounds that the buyer repudiated by not obtaining the loan, a condition which had to be strictly complied with and could not be waived.

The court first looked at the proper meaning of contract terms and found that the literal meaning of the words in the agreement when literally interpreted did not give rise to a condition that obligated the buyer to obtain a loan. The court said that:  

The clause is not capable of the contrary interpretation that was contended for by the respondent namely that the appellant was obliged to obtain a loan. The words ‘[i]n the event of the Purchaser requiring a mortgage loan’, cannot be wished away and render the respondent’s interpretation untenable. The clause is clear. The condition precedent of obtaining a mortgage loan was for the benefit of the appellant and only arose if the appellant required finance. 

The court went on to deal with the issue of whether a party can unilaterally waive the condition. It held that bond applications are primarily for the benefit of the buyer – and that regardless of whether the associated condition is suspensive, the condition is not intended to protect the seller. As such, a buyer has the right to waive the condition unilaterally i.e. the act of waiver does not require acceptance from another party.

This case highlights the importance of parties being aware of what they conclude and the terminology they use. Courts will give literal meaning to the words they have used, as they emphasise party autonomy and the principle of pacta sunt servanda (contractual freedom). It is therefore vital that correct contractual wording is used when concluding a sale agreement, as not everything with the word ‘condition’ qualifies it as a ‘suspensive condition’.

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.

Recommended for you

Minors and immovable property
Contractual Matters

When ownership of immovable property is vested in a company[post_view before=""]

There are instances where ownership of land is vested in a company. Typically, a company is registered, usually with one or two directors, and such company then takes transfer of the immovable property. The land is then held in the name of the legal entity (being the company), with the individuals or directors who intend to stay there holding shares in the company.

Read More
Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Contractual Matters

An ethical approach to fee discounts[post_view before=""]

Legal fees are regulated by tariff guidelines, which are issued by the Rules Board in terms of the Legal Practice Act. Although these tariffs are guidelines, they are typically followed in the conveyancing industry. As a result, if fees are ever queried, they can usually be backed up by the regulations issued in the Government Gazette from time to time.

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Contractual Matters

The Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019: what you need to know[post_view before=""]

In 2017, the Government undertook to interrogate the Estate Agency Affairs Act and replace it with one it deemed more suitable. The result was the Property Practitioners Act (PPA), which came into effect on 1 February 2022. In this article, we’ll be touching on some of the highlights – or lowlights, depending on your point of view – of this new act.

Read More
Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Contractual Matters

Pay with complete peace of mind[post_view before=""]

With cybercrime on the increase globally, the team at Snymans is increasingly aware of the importance of safeguarding both our clients and our business against cyber criminals when it comes to making and receiving electronic payments. In fact, phishing crimes have become such a cause for concern in South Africa that the Legal Practitioners’ Fidelity Fund has declared that it will not make good on insurance claims arising from these types of crimes.

Read More
Buying tenanted properties - don’t get caught out
Contractual Matters

Property transfer costs: Who pays what?[post_view before=""]

The buyer and seller of a property are responsible for certain costs associated with the transfer process. Here’s a look at who’s liable for what.

Read More

Need more Snymans content?

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Suspensive conditions revisited in the Cape Royal case

South Africa’s law of contract provides several ways in which contracting parties can protect and enforce their contractual rights. The most essential principle of contract is party autonomy – parties to a contract are free to conclude what they have agreed to, and the courts have a duty to enforce this agreement as far as possible provided it is not against the law.

Buying Property On Auction | Property Blog Articles

In the sale of immovable property, the contract (commonly known as an Offer to Purchase) will have common and special terms designed to ensure that the agreement is fulfilled. 

Not everyone can afford to pay for an immovable property in cash, and in these cases the buyer will need to apply for a home loan from a bank. When it comes to a bond application, there is no guarantee that the loan will be granted by the bank. For the seller, the sale therefore remains uncertain until the loan is approved. To mitigate this risk and uncertainty, it’s become common practice for contracting parties to include a suspensive condition clause into their original contract.  

As a general rule, a suspensive condition creates an obligation – i.e. the fulfillment of a specific future event, upon which application of the contract will continue. In the sale of immovable property, the effect of the suspensive condition is that:  

  • The agreement is suspended until such time as the bank loan is obtained.
  • If the debtor fails to obtain a bank loan by the specified date, the sale agreement (subject to any contractual extensions) becomes null and void from its inception.

The Cape Royal case

What if the wording of the condition precedent does not reflect its nature? Can a party to a contract unilaterally waive performance of the condition? In the case of Noel Patrick McGrane and Cape Royal, the parties entered into an agreement of sale that included a condition precedent that the buyer obtain a bond in order to continue with the sale agreement. The buyer later paid in cash and therefore did not fulfill this condition’s requirements. This resulted in the seller repudiating the contract on the grounds that the buyer repudiated by not obtaining the loan, a condition which had to be strictly complied with and could not be waived.

The court first looked at the proper meaning of contract terms and found that the literal meaning of the words in the agreement when literally interpreted did not give rise to a condition that obligated the buyer to obtain a loan. The court said that:  

The clause is not capable of the contrary interpretation that was contended for by the respondent namely that the appellant was obliged to obtain a loan. The words ‘[i]n the event of the Purchaser requiring a mortgage loan’, cannot be wished away and render the respondent’s interpretation untenable. The clause is clear. The condition precedent of obtaining a mortgage loan was for the benefit of the appellant and only arose if the appellant required finance. 

The court went on to deal with the issue of whether a party can unilaterally waive the condition. It held that bond applications are primarily for the benefit of the buyer – and that regardless of whether the associated condition is suspensive, the condition is not intended to protect the seller. As such, a buyer has the right to waive the condition unilaterally i.e. the act of waiver does not require acceptance from another party.

This case highlights the importance of parties being aware of what they conclude and the terminology they use. Courts will give literal meaning to the words they have used, as they emphasise party autonomy and the principle of pacta sunt servanda (contractual freedom). It is therefore vital that correct contractual wording is used when concluding a sale agreement, as not everything with the word ‘condition’ qualifies it as a ‘suspensive condition’.

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.