Exam (elaborations)
PVL3701 MCQ Memo Bundle
- Course
- PVL3701 - Law Of Property
- Institution
- University Of South Africa (Unisa)
PVL3701 MCQ Memo Bundle with references and feedback, from .
[Show more]
Content preview
2020/021 Under which of the following categories of things can a motorcycle be classified?
Indicate the incorrect option.
(1) Composite things.
(2) Movable things.
(3) Consumable things.
(4) Negotiable things.
Option (3): INCORRECT, a motorcycle is a non-consumable thing, because it is
preserved even though it is used. Although it is subject to normal wear and tear it can
still be classified as a nonconsumable. The value of a consumable thing diminishes
considerably by ordinary use. Examples of consumables are pencils and food.
Option (1): Correct, a motorcycle is a composite thing. A composite thing is made up
of constituent parts, or even of independent things that have been joined together to
form a new entity.
Option (2): Correct, a motorcycle is a movable thing, because it can be moved from
one place to another without being damaged or without losing its identity.
Option (4): Correct, a motorcycle is a negotiable thing and can further be classified as
either a res nullius, if it does not belong to anyone or a res alicuius if it belongs to an
owner.
(Study Guide pages 21-25)
2 Samira bought a car in terms of an instalment sale agreement from Hoot Car Traders
and is in control of the car. She will pay off the last instalment at the end of January
2021. Which of the following statements is correct?
(1) Samira is the owner of the car.
(2) Samira is the lawful holder of the car.
(3) Samira has a real right over the car.
(4) Samira has a limited real right over the car.
,Option (2): CORRECT, Samira can be classified as lawful holder because she
physically controls the car with the permission of the owner (Hoot Car Traders) in order
to derive some benefit from it. Samira does not consider herself as the owner of the
car. She respects the ownership of Hoot Car Traders and will become owner of the
car after she paid the last instalment.
Option (1): Incorrect, Samira is not the owner of the car yet, she will become the owner
of the car after she paid the last instalment. No transfer of physical control will take
place, because Samira is already in physical control of the car, although she is not the
owner yet. Once she paid the last instalment she will become the owner of the car by
means of delivery with the shorthand.
Option (3): Incorrect, Samira will only acquire a real right – ownership – after she paid
the last instalment.
Option (4): Incorrect, Samira does not have a limited real right over the car. She has
a personal right against Hoot Car Traders to use the car while she is paying the
intalments.
(Study Guide pages 31 and 151)
3 Which one of the following real relationships is always lawful?
(1) bona fide possession
(2) ownership
(3) holdership
(4) mala fide possession
Option (2): CORRECT, the real relationship of an owner to his/her thing is ownership,
which is a lawful real relationship.
Option (1): Incorrect, bona fide possession is the real relationship of a person who is
not recognised as the owner of a thing, because he/she does not comply with the
requirements for establishing ownership, but who has the intention of an owner, on the
incorrect assumption that he/she is in fact the owner. The relationship of a person who
accidently takes someone else’s cell phone thinking that it belongs to him/her can be
,described as bona fide possession. Although such a person controls the cell phone
bona fide on the incorrect assumption, the relationship cannot be lawful.
Option (3): Incorrect, holdership is a relationship between a person who controls a
thing with the intention to derive a benefit from the thing, with the permission or other
valid legal ground to control the thing. Holdership can, however, be unlawful under
certain circumstances. For example if a person unknowingly concludes an invalid
lease contract. Such a person (“lessee”) can be described as a bona fide unlawful
holder.
Option (4): Incorrect, the relationship of a thief who controls a stolen thing can be
described as mala fide possession. Such a relationship cannot be lawful, because a
thief is aware of the fact that he/she is not recognised as the owner of the thing, but
controls the thing with the intention of an owner.
(Study Guide pages 150-151)
4 Indicate the correct option with regard to nuisance in the narrow sense.
(1) Nuisance in the narrow sense results in damage to property.
(2) An example of nuisance in the narrow sense is when an owner dumps slate on
his/her farm near a river, which slate washes down the river as a result of heavy rain
onto the neighbouring farm, causing damage to the latter farm.
(3) Regal v African Superslate 1963 (1) SA 102 (A) dealt with nuisance in the narrow
sense.
(4) Nuisance in the narrow sense occurs where a neighbour’s right of personality or
entitlement of use is infringed.
Option 4: CORRECT, nuisance in the narrow sense does not necessarily result in
damage to property, but a neighbour’s right of personality or entitlement of use is
infringed.
Option (1): Incorrect, nuisance in the broad sense results in damage to property.
Option (2): Incorrect, this example is an example of nuisance in the broad sense and
is based on the facts of Regal v African Superslate 1963 (1) SA 102 (A).
Option (3): Incorrect, Regal v African Superslate 1963 (1) SA 102 (A) dealt with
nuisance in the broad sense.
, (Study Guide pages 50-51)
5 The following is an example of alienation as an entitlement of ownership:
(1) X can register a bond over his property.
(2) X can burn his book.
(3) X can claim his car from Y.
(4) X can donate his bike to Y.
Option (4): CORRECT, a person is entitled to donate his/her thing. Ownership passes
from the donor (X) to the donee (Y).
Option (1): Incorrect, to register a bond over property is an example of the entitlement
to burden a thing by granting a limited real right (mortgage) over the thing.
Option (2): Incorrect, this is not an example of the entitlement to alienate property, but
an example of the entitlement to destroy property.
Option (3): Incorrect, this is not an example of the entitlement to alienate property, but
an example of the entitlement of an owner of a thing to vindicate or claim his/her thing
from anyone who is unlawfully in control of the thing.
(Study Guide pages 45-46)
6 Mike has a right of way (registered servitude), over Lebo’s farm. Mike has a dairy
farm and uses the road over Lebo’s farm to transport his milk to different shops in the
area. One day Mike and Lebo have a difference of opinion, after which Lebo locks the
gate that gives Mike access to the road. Does Mike have any remedies?
(1) No, as owner of the farm Lebo may do with it as she pleases, and she may prevent
Mike from using the road over her farm.
(2) Yes, Mike can institute the actio negatoria against Lebo to open the gate
(3) Yes, Mike’s personal servitude grants him a personal right against Lebo to use the
road.
(4) Yes, Mike can institute a mandatory interdict against Lebo to open the gate.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Teech. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R150,00. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
75323 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now