PVL3704 - Enrichment Liability & Estoppel, Feb 2021 MCQ Exam
77 views 0 purchase
Course
PVL3704 - Enrichment Liability And Estoppel
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
PVL3704 - Enrichment Liability & Estoppel
February 2021 Supplementary Exam (MCQ) Questions.
Contains 50 Questions (not answers) from the "random pool" of questions the paper is made up of.
Notes:
Working through these questions can help to prepare for examinations.
These are Questions only, without answers.
Random pool of questions, this is one question paper, but not all possible questions.
Some spelling and grammar errors are included, as they occurred in the paper.
Online exams no longer share past papers, this is similar to a past paper.
Some questions repeat, as they did in the exam.
,PART 1
Question 1 of 50:
A has demanded payment from B of an amount of R50 000,00 which he believes B is
owing. B has checked its records and has paid the amount in the bona fide belief that the
amount is owed in terms of their contract. Unbeknown to B, his bookkeeper, C had already
paid the amount a week earlier by way of an electronic funds transfer into the account of A,
but unfortunately used the wrong invoice number with the payment. This resulted in A not
being able to allocate the initial payment to B’s account. At the time of the second payment
A's account was overdrawn in the amount of R30 000,00 and was therefore in credit in the
amount of R20 000,00 after the payment. A has taken R10 000,00 out of his account to pay
his employees their monthly wages. He has also paid R10 000,00 for a luxury weekend
after realising that his account was in credit.
Which statement best explains the date on which the possible enrichment liability of A is
calculated?
A. The date on which B informs A that A has been overpaid in the amount of
R50 000,00.
B. The date on which B’s bank account was debited.
C. The date on which C paid the money into A’s account.
D. The date on which B lodges an enrichment action (litis contestatio).
E. The date on which A used the last of the money.
Question 2 of 50
A orders goods from B and pays for the goods with a cheque. B delivers the goods, but A
alleges that they are defective and A immediately instructs his bank, C, not to pay the value
of the cheque out to B. B denies that the goods are defective. A clerk of C bank forgets to
process A’s instruction to cancel payment and pays out the value of the cheque to B.
According to case law which element for enrichment liability is absent in this set of facts?
A. None of the options are correct.
B. Enrichment.
C. Causality.
D. Sine causa.
E. Impoverishment.
, Question 3 of 50
X has stolen O’s laptop computer from his office. The laptop is worth R15 000. X has sold
the laptop to B for R3 000, who is unaware of the theft.
Which statement best describes the remedy(ies) at O’s disposal?
A. O has no claim against B, because B paid for the laptop.
B. O has a delictual claim against X for R15 000 because X stole the computer.
C. O has a claim for the laptop itself from B with the actio rei vindicatio because he has
remained owner of the laptop, and O has a delictual claim against X for R15 000
because X stole the computer.
D. O has a claim for the laptop itself from B with the actio rei vindicatio because he has
remained owner of the laptop.
E. O has an enrichment claim for R3 000 against X, because that is all that remains in
his estate.
Question 4 of 50
X has stolen O’s laptop computer from his office. The laptop is worth R15 000. X has sold
the laptop to B for R3 000, who is unaware of the theft. B has sold the computer to C for R6
000. The current whereabouts of C are unknown.
Which statement best describes the remedies at O’s disposal?
A. O has an enrichment claim for R3 000 against B based on the condictio causa data
causa non secuta.
B. O has an enrichment claim for R3 000 against B based on the condictio sine causa
specialis.
C. O has no claim against B, because B paid for the laptop.
D. O has a claim for the laptop itself from B with the actio rei vindicatio because he has
remained owner of the laptop.
E. O has an enrichment claim for R3 000 against B based on the condictio ob finitam
causam.
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 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 these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller UnisaLawStudent. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $4.28. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
