How often Minors: capacity to act and contractual capacity is asked

Where it was asked

What costs marks here

The questions

1. May/Jun 2019, Q102 marks · multiple choice

   This section consists of 15 multiple-choice questions, each worth 2 marks, for a total of 30 marks. Unique number 479603. Answer these questions on the mark-reading sheet and copy the answers to the examination paper. Indicate which one of the following contracts concluded by four-year-old Nomsa is valid.

2. May/Jun 2019, Q112 marks · multiple choice

   This section consists of 15 multiple-choice questions, each worth 2 marks, for a total of 30 marks. Unique number 479603. Answer these questions on the mark-reading sheet and copy the answers to the examination paper. Without the assistance of his guardian, Tommy, a 16-year-old boy, concludes a contract with Leonard, a major, in terms of which Tommy sells his laptop to Leonard. Tommy delivers the laptop to Leonard, after which the contract is repudiated. Identify which remedy is available to Tommy in order to reclaim his laptop.

3. May/Jun 2019, Q122 marks · multiple choice

   This section consists of 15 multiple-choice questions, each worth 2 marks, for a total of 30 marks. Unique number 479603. Answer these questions on the mark-reading sheet and copy the answers to the examination paper. John, a 17-year-old boy, wants to enter into a civil union. From the options below, choose the only correct answer.

4. May/Jun 2019, Q132 marks · multiple choice

   This section consists of 15 multiple-choice questions, each worth 2 marks, for a total of 30 marks. Unique number 479603. Answer these questions on the mark-reading sheet and copy the answers to the examination paper. Indicate the only correct statement. Sarah is 17 years old and has recently concluded a valid civil marriage with Tom, who is 21 years old. Soon after the marriage Tom was killed in an aeroplane crash. What will the effect of Tom's death be?

5. May/Jun 2019, Q142 marks · multiple choice

   This section consists of 15 multiple-choice questions, each worth 2 marks, for a total of 30 marks. Unique number 479603. Answer these questions on the mark-reading sheet and copy the answers to the examination paper. Indicate which one of the following statements regarding emancipation is INCORRECT.

6. May/Jun 2019, Q3(a)(i)1 mark

   Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. State whether the following statement is true or false: an infans (a very young child) has no capacity to act.

7. May/Jun 2019, Q3(a)(ii)1 mark

   Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. State whether the following statement is true or false: an infans is a person who is younger than 12 months of age.

8. May/Jun 2019, Q3(a)(iii)1 mark

   Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. State whether the following statement is true or false: an infans can be held criminally liable because criminal liability is based on fault.

9. May/Jun 2019, Q3(b)(i)3 marks

   Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Using the facts about Andile (the 17-year-old minor who bought a Rolex watch worth R20 000 from Nadeem without her guardian's assistance, paid a R1 000 deposit, received the watch, then refused to pay further and was sued by Nadeem on 22 April 2019), determine whether Andile is liable to Nadeem and, if she is, identify the legal ground for her liability. Support your answer with reference to relevant case law.

10. May/Jun 2019, Q3(b)(ii)2 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Still working from Andile's situation (the unassisted 17-year-old minor who bought the R20 000 Rolex from Nadeem for a R1 000 deposit), now assume that Andile lost the watch one week after taking possession of it. Explain, giving a reason, whether she would be liable to Nadeem in these circumstances.

11. May/Jun 2019, Q3(b)(iii)5 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Continuing with Andile's facts, now assume that instead of losing the watch she did not lose it but sold it on 12 April to a friend for R10 000. Of this R10 000, she spent R500 on a new pair of jeans (since her only other pair was badly torn), spent R1 500 on a massage at a spa, and deposited the remaining R8 000 into her savings account. Explain whether Andile is liable to Nadeem and, if so, for what amount, dealing separately with each of the three amounts mentioned (the R500, the R1 500, and the R8 000).

12. May/Jun 2019, Q3(c)(i)2 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Now change the facts so that Andile did in fact have her guardian's consent when she entered into the contract with Nadeem to buy the R20 000 Rolex watch. On this basis, state whether Andile is liable to Nadeem and, if so, on what ground.

13. May/Jun 2019, Q3(c)(ii)3 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Still assuming Andile had her guardian's consent to buy the Rolex from Nadeem, suppose that a week after the transaction Andile discovers that the watch is in fact a fake worth less than R100. She approaches you for legal advice. Explain what remedy is available to her in these circumstances and list the requirements that must be met for this remedy to succeed.

14. May/Jun 2019, Q3(c)(iii)3 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Again assuming Andile had her guardian's consent, and that a week after the transaction she discovered the Rolex was a fake worth less than R100, now suppose that five years later, once she has turned 22, she decides she wants her money back from Nadeem. Explain, giving reasons, whether Andile has any remedy available to her at that stage.

15. May/Jun 2019, Q3(d)4 marks

    Questions 3(b) and 3(c) both rely on the same core scenario: on 5 April 2019, Andile, a 17-year-old minor, concluded a contract of sale with Nadeem, a 30-year-old businessman, without obtaining her guardian's assistance to do so. Andile did not misrepresent her age to Nadeem. In terms of the contract, Andile agreed to buy a Rolex wristwatch from Nadeem for R20 000. She paid a deposit of R1 000, and Nadeem handed the watch to her. Andile then refused to make any further payments, arguing that as a minor she is not bound by the contract. On 22 April 2019 Nadeem sued her for payment. Bongile is a 12-year-old boy who is mentally incapacitated. One Saturday morning, while his parents are out shopping, he goes on his own to the local hospital because he has a rash on his back and wants treatment for it. Explain what the relevant legislation provides regarding consent to medical treatment in a case like this, and advise the treating doctor whether he may lawfully treat Bongile.

16. May/Jun 2011, QA.52 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. Indicate what the court decided in the case of Landers v Estate Landers 1933 NPD 415: option 1, that a minor who misrepresented himself as a major cannot rely on restitutio in integrum; option 2, that a minor incurs liability if he entered into a contract without assistance and benefited from it; option 3, that a minor is liable if he entered into an unassisted contract and is enriched at the expense of the other contracting party; or option 4, that a minor who lost his inheritance because his guardian failed to protect his interests was granted restitutio in integrum.

17. May/Jun 2011, QA.62 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. Determine when a minor becomes liable for unjustified enrichment: option 1, if he or she misled the other contracting party into believing he or she was an emancipated minor; option 2, if he or she obtained a patrimonial advantage at another's expense without any legal ground justifying the enrichment; option 3, if he or she entered into a contract with the guardian's consent and the contract was to the minor's disadvantage when concluded; or option 4, if he or she contracted unassisted and the contract, viewed as a whole, is to the minor's advantage.

18. May/Jun 2011, QA.92 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. Identify which one of the following statements about the emancipation of a minor is INCORRECT: option 1, either parent may emancipate the child, provided that parent holds guardianship; option 2, it is uncertain whether a guardian who has emancipated a minor may later revoke that emancipation; option 3, the onus of proving that emancipation has taken place rests on the parent or guardian of the minor; or option 4, a minor is emancipated if his or her guardian grants him or her the freedom to enter into contracts independently.

19. May/Jun 2011, QA.112 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. On 20 February 2011, Themba, a 15-year-old minor, concludes a contract of sale with Mr Mokoena, a major, without the assistance of his legal guardian. Under the contract, Mr Mokoena sells Themba a motorcycle for R6 000, although the motorcycle's actual value at the time the contract was concluded was R5 000. On 20 March 2011, one month after the motorcycle was delivered to him, Themba resells it for R3 000. He spends this R3 000 as follows: R1 000 on liquor and other refreshments for a party (already consumed), and the remaining R2 000 on paying for his accommodation. On 5 April 2011, Mr Mokoena institutes action against Themba. Indicate which amount Mr Mokoena will be able to claim from Themba on the ground of unjustified enrichment: option 1, R1 000; option 2, R2 000; option 3, R5 000; or option 4, R6 000.

20. May/Jun 2011, QA.122 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. Assume the same facts as in question A.11 (Themba, aged 15, who without his guardian's assistance bought a motorcycle worth R5 000 from Mr Mokoena for R6 000, later resold it for R3 000, and spent R1 000 on consumed liquor and refreshments for a party and R2 000 on accommodation), except that the date on which action is instituted differs: here Mr Mokoena institutes action on 5 March instead. Indicate which amount Mr Mokoena will be able to claim from Themba on the ground of unjustified enrichment: option 1, R1 000; option 2, R2 000; option 3, R5 000; or option 4, R6 000.

21. May/Jun 2011, QA.132 marks · multiple choice

    This is Section A, the multiple-choice component of the Law of Persons (Private Law) examination. Candidates must mark their answers on the mark-reading sheet and then transfer (copy) those same answers onto the examination paper itself. The unique number for this section is 472051 for PVL1501 or 487164 for PVL101Q. Fifteen questions are set, each worth 2 marks, giving a section total of 30 marks. Determine which one of the following a 14-year-old minor may do without parental assistance or consent: option 1, be a trustee in an insolvent estate; option 2, be a depositor at a mutual bank; option 3, act as a witness to a will; or option 4, make his or her own will.

22. May/Jun 2011, Q3(a)(i)2 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Explain what is meant by the term 'unilateral contract'.

23. May/Jun 2011, Q3(a)(ii)1 mark

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Provide an example of a unilateral contract.

24. May/Jun 2011, Q3(a)(iii)2 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Explain what is meant by the term 'multilateral contract'.

25. May/Jun 2011, Q3(a)(iv)1 mark

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Provide an example of a multilateral contract.

26. May/Jun 2011, Q3(b)3 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. List the different forms that a guardian's assistance to a minor's contract may take.

27. May/Jun 2011, Q3(c)(i)3 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Given that Mary (17 years old), without her guardian's consent, entered into a R12 000 contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television, and induced him to contract with her by fraudulently presenting a forged identity document showing her as 18 years old, paid a R500 deposit, received the television, and now refuses to pay the outstanding balance claiming minority as a defence: a minor who commits such a misrepresentation (as Mary did) commits a delict and may therefore be held delictually liable, meaning the prejudiced party (Mr Naidoo) has a claim for damages against the minor who committed the delict. State the requirements that must be met for delictual liability to arise in these circumstances.

28. May/Jun 2011, Q3(c)(ii)1 mark

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Some legal commentators argue instead for contractual liability of a minor who has committed a misrepresentation. Name the court case in which such contractual liability was considered, being a case where a minor misrepresented himself as an emancipated minor when, without the necessary assistance, he purchased a motorcycle from a major.

29. May/Jun 2011, Q3(c)(iii)1 mark

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. With reference to the case identified in question 3(c)(ii) above, state what the court decided regarding the money that the minor had already paid.

30. May/Jun 2011, Q3(c)(iv)3 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Suppose instead that Mr Naidoo was not deceived by Mary's attempt to pass herself off as a major, it being obvious to him that she was in fact a minor. Discuss whether Mary would still be liable to Mr Naidoo on the basis of misrepresentation in these circumstances.

31. May/Jun 2011, Q3(d)3 marks

    This question concerns unilateral and multilateral contracts, the assistance a guardian may give a minor when the minor enters into a contract, and a scenario involving Mary, a 17-year-old girl, who without her guardian's assistance concludes a contract with Mr Naidoo (a major) to buy a television for R12 000, misleading him with a forged identity document into believing she is 18; she pays a R500 deposit, receives the television, and then refuses to pay the balance, claiming minority status exempts her from liability, prompting Mr Naidoo to seek your advice. Briefly explain a minor's capacity to incur criminal liability.