LL.M. (Banking Law) / It has long been the vogue that the traditional fraud exception is the only exception capable of defeating the doctrine of independence in documentary-credit and performance-guarantee practice. The reason for this is self-explanatory, for it has been stated authoritatively that fraud unravels all. And on construction, this must be the correct legal position. Even then however, the fraud exception is not in itself unassailable. Given the nature and exigency of the contractual relationships peculiar to documentary credits and performance guarantees, it is indubitable for their success that these unique contractual relationships be independent of one another. The latter argument is well established in the law and practice of many jurisdictions. Commercial comity, aspirations, expediency, fair trading and a measure of certainty, inter alia, dictate the necessity for the sanctity and preservation of the doctrine of independence. Without such certainty, international commercial enterprise and entrepreneurship will be the victims. Nevertheless, it would still be fair to state that there is a broad consensus within various jurisdictions regarding the application of a fraud exception to the doctrine of independence, which simply cannot be said for an exception based on unconscionability. There are cogent reasons for this disparity, some in favour of and some against an unconscionability exception. The question which begs an answer is whether the recognition of such an exception would erode the certainty and cash characteristics, inherent and integral to documentary credit and performance guarantee practice. These instruments were, after all, designed and predicated upon tenets of certainty and considered as immediately redeemable cash. Ultimately, this debate involves a choice between embracing commercial certainty on the one hand, and fairness on the other hand. In South Africa however, unconscionability does not exist as a specific concept of law with wide and uncertain parameters. But, the concept of good faith, equally confusing, awkwardly finds its place in the South African general law of contract, but in an informative capacity to the substantive requirements of the law, and not as an independent general defence. A defence in the general law of contract in South Africa, premised on the lack of good faith is bad in law, given the established brocards such as inter alia, caveat subscriptor, caveat emptor, pacta sunt servanda, 5 and the contra proferentem rule. South African legal heritage and precedent have jettisoned the exceptio doli generalis, and this precedent is peculiarly protected by the judiciary at the highest level. Good faith, in the South African context, is not the equivalent of the so called doctrine of unconscionability analysed and discussed in the academic literature and court decisions of certain common-law jurisdictions, but the exceptio doli generalis may have been, or rather, if properly developed, could have been. And so, from a South African perspective, there is the added difficulty of considering the introduction of a foreign broad-based, uncertain and undefinable doctrine grounded in equity, when the narrowly defined concept of good faith, only informative of the substantive law, finds no general application in the law of contract in South Africa. Regard will thus be had to inter alia: the nature, scope and elements (facta probanda) of this exception; certain arguments for and against its recognition; its inability to be defined with the necessary precision required for legal efficacy and practice; its lack of certainty being in essence descriptive of a host of other conduct short of fraud and inclusive of fraud; and whether the case for its recognition might perhaps have merit and applicability in relation to performance guarantees, separate and distinct from documentary credits.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This thesis investigates the approach to non-disclosure as a form of misrepresentation in South African law. The primary focus is the question of liability, and whether parties should be able to claim relief based on non-disclosure. In order to determine this, attention is also paid to the standards which have traditionally been employed in cases of non-disclosure, and it is questioned whether a general test can be formulated which could be used in all such instances. The point of departure in this discussion is a general historical and comparative overview of the law relating to non-disclosure. This overview places the position in modern South African law in context, and highlights some of the similarities between our current position regarding non-disclosure and the position in other jurisdictions. The overview also sets out the provisions relating to non-disclosure in international legal instruments, which could be of use in interpreting concepts used in our law. The study then shifts to an exploration of the specific situations, such as the conclusion of insurance agreements, or agreements of sale involving latent defects, where South African law automatically imposes a duty of disclosure. These instances are the exception to the general rule against imposing duties of disclosure on contracting parties. The study reveals that certain principles are applied in more than one of these exceptional cases, and attention is paid to each in order to determine which principles are most prevalent. It is suggested that the nature of the relationship between the parties is the underlying reason for always imposing duties of disclosure in these circumstances. Attention is then paid to the judicial development of the law relating to non-disclosure, specifically in those cases which fall outside the recognised special cases referred to above. The remedies available to a party when they have been wronged by another’s non-disclosure are identified and investigated here, namely rescission and damages. A distinction is drawn between the treatment of non-disclosure in the contractual sphere and the approach taken in the law of delict. The different requirements for each remedy are explored and evaluated. A detailed examination of the key judgments relating to non-disclosure shows us that the judiciary apply similar principles to those identified in the discussion of the exceptional instances when deciding to impose liability based on non-disclosure. Reliance is also placed on the standards set out in the earlier historical and comparative discussion. The most prevalent of these standards are the nature of the relationship between the parties and the good faith principle. It is then considered whether all of these principles and elements could be used in order to distill one general standard that could be used to determine whether non-disclosure could give rise to relief. The conclusion is drawn that it may not be advisable to adopt such a standard, and that the seemingly fragmented treatment of non-disclosure in South African law thus far has enabled its development and will continue to do so. A number of key considerations have been identified as possible standards, and these considerations can be applied by the judiciary on a case by case basis. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie tesis ondersoek wanvoorstelling deur stilswye in die Suid-Afrikaanse kontraktereg. Die primêre fokus is op wanneer stilswye aanleiding gee tot aanspreeklikheid, en watter remedies daaruit voortvloei. Om dit vas te stel, word aandag geskenk aan die standaarde wat tradisioneel gebruik word in gevalle van stilswye, en word veral bevraagteken of 'n algemene toets formuleer kan word wat in al sulke gevalle toepassing sou kon vind. Die ondersoek begin met ‘n algemene historiese en regsvergelykende oorsig, wat die konteks verskaf vir die analise van die posisie in die moderne Suid-Afrikaanse reg, en ooreenkomste tussen hierdie posisie en die benadering in ander jurisdiksies na vore bring. Die bepalings van sekere internasionale regsinstrumente wat spesifiek met stilswye handel, word ook ondersoek om te bepaal hulle van nut kan wees by die uitleg van konsepte wat in die Suid- Afrikaanse reg gebruik word. Die fokus van die studie verskuif dan na spesifieke, uitsonderlike gevalle waar die Suid- Afrikaanse reg outomaties ‘n openbaringsplig tussen partye erken. Prominente voorbeelde is versekeringskontrakte en koopkontrakte waar die merx ‘n verborge gebrek het. Hierdie gevalle is uitsonderings op die algemene reël dat kontrakspartye nie openbaringspligte het nie. Dit kom voor dat sekere gemeenskaplike beginsels van toepassing is in sekere van die uitsonderingsgevalle, en dit word ondersoek hoekom hierdie beginsels gereeld na vore tree. Dit word ook voorgestel dat die aard van die verhouding tussen die partye die onderliggende rede is waarom ons reg openbaringspligte in hierdie spesifieke omstandighede oplê. Aandag word dan geskenk aan die regterlike ontwikkeling van die regsposisie ten opsigte van stilswye in gevalle wat nie by een van die bogenoemde erkende uitsonderings tuisgebring kan word nie. Die remedies beskikbaar aan partye wanneer hulle deur ‘n ander se stilswye benadeel is, word hier geïdentifiseer en ondersoek. Hierdie remedies is die kontraktuele remedie van aanvegting (moontlik gevolg deur teruggawe) en die deliktuele remedie van skadevergoeding. ‘n Onderskeid word ook getref tussen die hantering van stilswye in die kontraktereg en die benadering wat in die deliktereg gevolg word. Aan die hand van hierdie onderskeid word die vereistes vir albei remedies bepreek. Die belangrikste uitsprake van die howe in gevalle wat nie by die spesifieke, uitsonderlike kategorieë tuisgebring kan word nie, word dan oorweeg. Dit is duidelik dat die howe in die konteks van hierdie residuele gevalle soortgelyke beginsels geïdentifiseer het as dié wat voorgekom het by gevalle soos versekering en koop. Uit hierdie uitsprake blyk dit ook duidelik dat die howe ag slaan op soortgelyke standaarde as dié wat in die historiese en vergelykende oorsig na vore getree het. In dié verband is die aard van die partye se verhouding en die goeie trou beginsel veral prominent. Ten slotte word oorweeg of die beginsels en elemente wat hierbo geïdentifiseer is, gebruik kan word om ‘n algemene standaard te ontwikkel wat gebruik sal kan word om te bepaal of ʼn openbaringsplig ontstaan. Die gevolgtrekking word bereik dat so ‘n algemene standaard nie noodwendig die beste oplossing is nie. Die oënskynlik gefragmenteerde hantering van stilswye in die Suid-Afrikaanse het tot dusver tog regsontwikkeling bevorder, en sal waarskynlik ook voortgaan om dit te doen. ʼn Aantal kernoorwegings kan wel geïdentifiseer word, wat dan sou kon dien as moontlike standaarde wat regsontwikkeling verder sou kon bevorder, en wat deur die howe toegepas sou kon word na gelang van die spesifieke omstandighede van elke saak.

The legal historical development of fairness in the South African common law of contract is investigated in the context of the political, social and economic developments of the last four centuries. It emerges that the common law of contract is still dominated by the ideologies of individualism and economic liberalism which were imported from English law during the nineteenth century. Together with the theories of legal positivism and formalism which are closely related to parliamentary sovereignty and the classical rule of law, these ideals were transposed into the common law of contract through the classical model of contract law which emphasises freedom and sanctity of contract and promotes legal certainty. This approach resulted in the negation of the court’s equitable discretion and the limitation of good faith which sustain the social and economic inequalities that were created under colonialism and exacerbated under apartheid rule. In stark contrast, the modern human rights culture grounded in human dignity and aimed at the promotion of substantive equality led to the introduction of modern contract theory in other parts of the world. The introduction of the Constitution as grounded in human dignity and aimed at the achievement of substantive equality has resulted in a sophisticated jurisprudence on human dignity that reflects a harmonisation between its Western conception as based on Kantian dignity and ubuntu which provides an African understanding thereof. In this respect, ubuntu plays an important role in infusing the common law of contract with African values and in promoting substantive equality between contracting parties in line with modern contract theory. It is submitted that this approach to human dignity should result in the development of good faith into a substantive rule of the common law of contract which can be used to set aside an unfair contract term or the unfair enforcement thereof. / Private Law / LL. D.