A.

SECTION A
A.1. QUESTION 1
A.1.1.
Yes, there is a valid contract of sale between Jennifer Harris and Grant Adams.

Both Jennifer Harris and Grant Adams are over the age of 18 and are natural persons.
They both therefore have contractual capacity.

There is legality as the sale is not contrary to any legislation, public policy or good morals,
and Grant Adams is the owner of the motor cycle.

There is physical possibility in that it is absolutely objectively possible for both parties to
perform their respective obligations stemming from the agreement. The performance is
clearly defined in that Grant Adams will sell his motor cycle to Jennifer Harris and
Jennifer Harris will pay Grant Adams R20, 000.00 for it. There is also a clear date of
when delivery is required to take place and when payment is required to be made.

There is consensus between the parties as Jennifer Harris made an offer to purchase the
motor cycle from Grant Adams for R20, 000.00 and Grant Adams has accepted that offer.
Both parties have accepted the delivery date and purchase price which they indicated by
signing the written contract.

There are no required formalities for a purchase agreement where the contract itself does
not call for any. The fact that both parties have signed a written contract solidifies the
contents of the agreement.

Further to this the specific elements required for a purchase and sale contract are also
adhered to in that there is an intention to buy and sell which is specifically present and
the object of sale is clearly determinable, the motor cycle (however I do feel that the
description of motor cycle is very vague and could lead to unnecessary confusion as
there is no mention of colour, make, model or year model, engine capacity or even a
photo) and the price has clearly been determined, R20, 000.00

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 1

 A.1.2.
Between Jennifer Harris and Grant Adams there is a credit sale. There is an intention to
pass and receive ownership between Grant Adams and Jennifer Harris. Grant Adams is
the owner of the motor cycle. Therefore ownership transfer occurs upon delivery of the
motor cycle to Jennifer Harris on 10 January 2012.

Then between Jennifer Harris and Pauline Scott there is a cash sale. Although the
contract between Jennifer Harris and Pauline Scott is concluded before Jennifer Harris
has ownership of the motor cycle, it is still a valid contract as ownership is not a
requirement to sell or concluding contract for purchase and sale. There is an intention to
pass or receive ownership between Jennifer Harris and Pauline Scott. Jennifer Harris has
ownership of the motor cycle as of 10 January 2012, so when Jennifer Harris delivers the
motor cycle on 15 January 2012 the ownership of the motor cycle passes from Jennifer
Harris to Pauline Scott. Therefore on 16 January 2012 Pauline Scott is the owner of the
motor cycle.

A.1.3.
The event that leads to Grant Adams accident is a force majeure event as the fault of the
accident was not Grant Adams or Jennifer Harris but rather the drunk driver of the other
car that not Grant Adams. In light of this there is no fault of any party to the contract.
Since the signing of the contract was on 01 January 2012 and Grant Adams was on his
way to deliver the motor cycle to Jennifer Harris on 10 January, so at this point ownership
still had not passed from Grant Adams to Jennifer Harris, and Grant Adams was involved
in an accident which makes it impossible for Grant Adams to deliver the motor cycle due
to a force majeure event, then Jennifer Harris carries the risk of damage/loss to the motor
cycle if the contract is perfecta.

There is no suspensive condition in the contract between Grant Adams and Jennifer
Harris. The price is clearly determined and the goods are determinable so the contract is
perfecta. Therefore Jennifer Harris carries the risk of damages/loss to the motor cycle.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 2

 A.2. QUESTION 2
A.2.1.
Default by Creditor – The Kruger National Park (KNP) has an obligation to allow Peter
Parker access to the Park which they failed to do preventing him from completing the
Works. Kruger National Park (KNP) in this case is the Creditor of the Works and therefore
default by Creditor breach of contract
Prevention of Performance – The Kruger National Park failed to allow Peter Parker
access to the park preventing him from completing the works. This makes it impossible
for Peter to complete his obligations therefore prevention of performance breach of
contract.
A.2.2.
Default by Debtor – The Kruger National Park is the Debtor with regards to payment and
have an obligation to pay Peter Parker which they failed to do therefore default by Debtor
breach of contract
A.2.3.
Default by Debtor – Peter Parker is the Debtor with regards to the Works as he has an
obligation to deliver the plans, and he failed to deliver the plans therefore default by
Debtor breach of contract
A.2.4.
Repudiation – Peter Parker has clearly communicated to the Kruger National Park that he
will be unable to perform his contractual obligations so therefore repudiation breach of
contract
A.2.5.
Prevention of Performance – Peter Parker has provided the incorrect banking details in
the contract. Peter has made it impossible for the Kruger National Park to carry out their
performance of paying Peter on time therefore Prevention of Performance Breach of
Contract.
A.2.6.
Positive Malperformance – Peter Parker has an obligation to provide plans for a bridge
over the Sabie River. Peter Parker has provided plans for a bridge spanning the incorrect
river. This is a defective performance therefore positive malperformance breach of
contract.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 3

 A.3. QUESTION 3

AGREEMENT

This Agreement made and entered into by and between:

Thomas James Baines

Identity Number 7712015126085
75 Barkly Avenue, Roodepoort, Johannesburg

(hereinafter referred to as “the Contractor”) of the one part and

Roads Unlimited (Pty) Ltd

Registration number 2001/005869/07
Herein represented by Donovan Phillip Richardson
Identity Number 7907185115085
Duly authorised thereto by a resolution by the board of directors.

(hereinafter referred to as “the Client”) of the other part.

Whereas the Client requires that certain Services as further defined in the Agreement should
be performed by the Contractor, as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the
Client and the Client has agreed to pay the Contractor for such services as defined in the
Agreement.

1) Services
The Contractor agrees to design a new suspension bridge, supporting 4 lanes of traffic for
both passenger and commercial vehicles, including all support structures, which is to be
constructed over the Sable River mountain pass.

2) Time
The Contractor agrees to complete and deliver the design in its entirety to the Client by 18
July 2013. The Client shall provide the Contractor with access to site from 18 February
2013 to 28 February 2013 to complete final measurements for the design.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 4

 3) Payment
This Agreement will have a Lump Sum Value of R2,500,000.00 ZAR and the Client has
accepted a proposal by the Contractor for the performance of such services. An upfront
payment of R500,000.00 will be paid by the Client to the Contractor on 18 February 2013.
The Client will pay the Contractor R250,000.00 per month on the 18th day of the month for
4 (four) subsequent months. The Client will make a final payment to Contractor of
R1,000,000.00 on 18 July 2013. All payments will be made via EFT to the following bank
account: ABSA Bank, Cheque Account # 406 555 011, Branch Code 632005.

4) Suspensive Condition
This Agreement will not come into full force and effect until such time as the Contractor
provides proof of active registration as a structural engineer with the Engineering Council
of South Africa (ECSA) to the Client.

5) Resolutive time period

If at any time the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) revokes the Contractors
registration as a structural engineer the Client shall have no liability to pay the Contractor
for any performance already completed and the Agreement shall become void.

6) Cancellation
If any Party to this Agreement breaches a material obligation in terms of the Agreement,
the other Party shall give the defaulting Party written notice of the breach and afford the
defaulting Party 14 (fourteen) calendar days to remedy the breach. Where the breach is
not so remedied, the aggrieved Party may terminate the Agreement immediately.

7) Penalties
Should the Contractor fail to deliver the final design by 18 July 2013, the Contractor will
incur penalty costs of R10, 000.00 (ten thousand rand) per calendar day of delay. The
Client may elect to claim the agreed penalty, or to claim common law damages. The Client
may retain any drawings, partial designs, and electronic communications and / or any
other performance provided by the Contractor in terms of this Agreement, continue to
enforce the further performance of the Agreement, without prejudice to the Client’s right to
claim the agreed penalty.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 5

 8) Force Majeure
i) Neither party shall be liable to the other party in the event that it is prevented from
fulfilling its obligations under the Agreement by reason of an event or
circumstance which is beyond both parties’ reasonable control and which was not
reasonably foreseeable at the time of entering into the Agreement (hereinafter
referred to as “Force Majeure”) including, but limited to the following:

a. war, hostilities (whether war be declared or not), invasion, act of foreign

enemies, rebellion, revolution, insurrection, or military or usurped power, civil
war, riot and civil commotion, act of government, or

b. natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, epidemics and

abnormal weather conditions such as hurricanes, tempests and floods.

ii) If either party is prevented from performing any of its obligations under the
Agreement by and event if Force Majeure, it shall give written notice to the other
party of the vent in question and shall specify the extent to which performance of
its obligations is or will be prevented. Such notice shall be given within 14
(fourteen) calendar days after the affected party became aware, or should have
become aware of the relevant event. Having given such notice, the affected party
shall be excused performance of such obligations for as long as the relevant
event prevents it from performing them.

iii) If an event of Force Majeure prevents the affected party from performing its
obligations under the Agreement for a continuous period of 28 (twenty-eight)
calendar days or multiple periods which total more than 36 (thirty-six) calendar
days, that party will be entitled to terminate the Agreement upon 7 (seven)
calendar days written notice.

9) Amendment
Any and all changes or amendments to the Agreement, including to this clause, must be in
writing and signed by both parties hereto.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 6

 Thus signed and concluded on the _________ of __________ 2013 at __________________.

____________________________
Contractor

Thus signed and concluded on the _________ of __________ 2013 at __________________.

____________________________
For and on behalf of the Client, warranting his authority to do so
Full Names: Donovan Phillip Richardson
Designation: Project Manager

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 7

 B. SECTION B
B.1. QUESTION 1
B.1.1.
The Control Test
The Organisation Test
The Dominant Impression Test
The Economic Capacity Test / Productivity Capacity Test
B.1.2.
This is an agreement between 2 parties, in which the employee agrees to perform certain
duties for the employer under the control of the employer for a specified or unspecified
period
B.1.3.
Constructive dismissal is when a situation arises in the workplace, that has been created
by the employer, and which makes the continuation of the employment relationship
intolerable or unbearable for the employee which is so serious that the employee has no
other option left but to resign.
B.1.4.
If an employer has dismissed several employees all for the same or even similar reasons
and then later offers re-employment to some of those employees, the employees who did
not get offered re-employment have technically been dismissed under the selective re-
employment dismissal term.
B.1.5.
Black people, women and people with disabilities
B.1.6.
Affirmative action, inherent job requirement or based on age if the employee has reached
the normal or agreed retirement age
B.1.7.
Poor work performance and disability
B.1.8.
Misconduct such as an act of violence or damage to property or stealing
Operational reasons such as when a strike continues for a long period and the employer
suffers economically and will have to retrench employees

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 8

 B.1.9.
The principle of no work no pay will apply and therefore if employees cannot work due to
the strike or lock-out they will not get paid
B.1.10.
Severance pay is at least one week’s salary for every full year worked or year of service

B.2. QUESTION 2
B.2.1. 2

B.2.2. 4

B.2.3. 45

B.2.4. 2

B.2.5. 21

B.2.6. 6

B.2.7. 2

B.2.8. 4

B.2.9. 3

B.2.10. 0

B.3. QUESTION 3
B.3.1.
Michelle has been subject to unfair labour practice in that she was not consulted or informed
as to why she was being demoted. Michelle has suffered on occupational detriment in
contravention of the protected disclosures act, 200 (act No.26 of 2000), on account of her
having made a protected disclosure defined in that act.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 9

 She can try and follow her internal company policy in terms of lodging a grievance but more
than likely will need to approach the CCMA (Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and
Arbitration). The CCMA’s remedy would be to rectify the unfairness that Michelle has
experienced by ordering that she have her old job back.

B.3.2.
If Michelle had been dismissed instead of demoted this would be an automatic unfair
constructive dismissal and would be discrimination. Michelle could go straight to the CCMA
and inform them that she had been dismissed after she had made a protected disclosure
defined in the protected disclosures act, 200 (act No.26 of 2000). The CCMA can order, upon
finding in favour of Michelle, the company to pay a maximum penalty of 2 years’ salary to
Michelle.

Legal Aspects for Project Managers Assignment – EM / 081 Page 10