[4] The plaintiff and the defendants entered into a written contract on 28 April 2009 for the purchase of an immovable property situated at Erf 3295, 19 Galen Street, Windhoek West, measuring in which, if the extent 1500 square meters (‘the property’) defendants honoured the agreement, was to be sold for N$ 1.3 million. Transfer was agreed to take place on 28 April 2010 so as to allow the defendants to secure the purchase price from a pension pay-out due to the second defendant from Germany. Pending the transfer of the property the defendants were to pay to the plaintiff monthly occupational rent in the amount of N$ 3500. The defendants took occupation of the property immediately after the conclusion of the agreement. [5] The defendants were unable to pay the purchase price on due date and the plaintiff extended the effective date to 31 July 2010 and eventually to 30 September 2010. It is common cause that the defendants, although repeatedly encouraged by the plaintiff to do so, did not seek any loan finance to purchase the property and entirely relied on the pension pay-out from Germany in order to buy the property. [6] In the event, the defendants repudiated the agreement on 30 July 2010 after the plaintiff had granted them the extensions to allow them to secure the funds to purchase the property, claiming that they did not secure the pension payments from Germany to buy the property. The plaintiff accepted the repudiation on 6 August 2010, cancelled the agreement and thereafter sold the property to a third party through the services of an estate agent, Mrs Cotting Bauer. The estate agent was appointed on 2 August 2010. That is even before the plaintiff accepted the repudiation. It needs to be stated that the appointment of the estate agent occurred after the repudiation by the defendants. Nothing therefore turns on this fact. [7] The property was sold to Mr Jaarsveld after being in the market for three months at the price of N$ 1 280 000. The price included the estate commission of N$ 80 agent’s 000. The actual amount received from the sale was therefore N$ 1 200 000. The purchase price was thus N$ 20 000 less than what the plaintiff had agreed to sell it to the defendants. Mr Jaasveld, an employee of Nedbank registered a bond after the purchase in the amount of N$ 1 560 000. The claim plaintiff’s
[4] The plaintiff and the defendants entered into a written contract on 28 April 2009 for the purchase of an immovable property situated at Erf 3295, 19 Galen Street, Windhoek West, measuring in extent 1500 square meters (‘the property’) which, if the defendants honoured the agreement, was to be sold for N$ 1.3 million. Transfer was agreed to take place on 28 April 2010 so as to allow the defendants to secure the purchase price from a pension pay-out due to the second defendant from Germany. Pending the transfer of the property the defendants were to pay to the plaintiff monthly occupational rent in the amount of N$ 3500. The defendants took occupation of the property immediately after the conclusion of the agreement. [5] The defendants were unable to pay the purchase price on due date and the plaintiff extended the effective date to 31 July 2010 and eventually to 30 September 2010. It is common cause that the defendants, although repeatedly encouraged by the plaintiff to do so, did not seek any loan finance to purchase the property and entirely relied on the pension pay-out from Germany in order to buy the property. [6] In the event, the defendants repudiated the agreement on 30 July 2010 after the plaintiff had granted them the extensions to allow them to secure the funds to purchase the property, claiming that they did not secure the pension payments from Germany to buy the property. The plaintiff accepted the repudiation on 6 August 2010, cancelled the agreement and thereafter sold the property to a third party through the services of an estate agent, Mrs Cotting Bauer. The estate agent was appointed on 2 August 2010. That is even before the plaintiff accepted the repudiation. It needs to be stated that the appointment of the estate agent occurred after the repudiation by the defendants. Nothing therefore turns on this fact. [7] The property was sold to Mr Jaarsveld after being in the market for three months at the price of N$ 1 280 000. The price included the estate agent’s commission of N$ 80 000. The actual amount received from the sale was therefore N$ 1 200 000. The purchase price was thus N$ 20 000 less than what the plaintiff had agreed to sell it to the defendants. Mr Jaasveld, an employee of Nedbank registered a bond after the purchase in the amount of N$ 1 560 000. The plaintiff’s claim
Vogt%20v%20Erasmus%20(I%203943-%202010)%20[2014]%20NAHCMD%20200%20(25%20June%202014).docx