Kvnmutero
On this page, you find all documents, package deals, and flashcards offered by seller kvnmutero.
- 14
- 0
- 0
Community
- Followers
- Following
14 items
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes
- Class notes
- • 11 pages •
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes (FUR2601)
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes (FUR2601)
- Class notes
- • 22 pages •
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes (FUR2601)
Class notes LEV 3701 Law Of Evidence Admissibility Of Evidence Summary Exam Notes (PVL3701)
whether the bank, through the actions of its teller on the council’s premises, actually took possession of the money thereby completing the deposit made by the council. The court held that the conduct of the teller constituted the taking of a deposit by the bank and that the ownership of the money passed to the bank. One of the legal ramifications of a contract of deposit is that once it was proved that there was such a contract and that the deposit had been lost, the onus was on the depositor...
- Class notes
- • 7 pages •
whether the bank, through the actions of its teller on the council’s premises, actually took possession of the money thereby completing the deposit made by the council. The court held that the conduct of the teller constituted the taking of a deposit by the bank and that the ownership of the money passed to the bank. One of the legal ramifications of a contract of deposit is that once it was proved that there was such a contract and that the deposit had been lost, the onus was on the depositor...
Law of evidence
In McCarthy Retail Ltd v Shortdistance Carriers CC 2001 (3) SA 482 (SCA) para [9] the court said: “We now know from the hard print that there is a common-law basis for the acceptance of a general enrichment action, at least one of a subsidiary nature. In this respect the decision of the majority in Nortje’s case has been shown by the then largely dormant authority to be clearly wrong”. Critically discuss this statement with reference to relevant case law.
- Class notes
- • 22 pages •
In McCarthy Retail Ltd v Shortdistance Carriers CC 2001 (3) SA 482 (SCA) para [9] the court said: “We now know from the hard print that there is a common-law basis for the acceptance of a general enrichment action, at least one of a subsidiary nature. In this respect the decision of the majority in Nortje’s case has been shown by the then largely dormant authority to be clearly wrong”. Critically discuss this statement with reference to relevant case law.