Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice
When Is an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice Valid in South Africa?
An Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice is an electronic communication intended to exercise, preserve or enforce a right under a contract, such as giving notice of breach, demanding performance, exercising an option, notifying a claim, cancelling an agreement, changing an address for notices or communicating another contractually significant decision.
Whether an email or WhatsApp message constitutes a valid contractual notice in South Africa does not depend simply on the fact that the recipient received or read the message.
The starting point is the contract.
If the agreement expressly permits notices by email and identifies the relevant email addresses, an electronically transmitted notice may satisfy the contractual mechanism provided that the sender complies with the remaining requirements concerning content, timing, authority and delivery.
If the agreement requires delivery by hand, registered post or at a specified physical domicilium and says nothing about electronic communication, sending an email or WhatsApp message may create substantial legal risk.
South African courts have repeatedly emphasised the importance of the agreed notice mechanism. In Bowley Steels (Pty) Ltd v 10 Sterling Road (Pty) Ltd, the Gauteng High Court held that, unless email delivery and the relevant email address had been agreed, sending a notice by email was not equivalent to delivering that notice at the chosen physical domicilium.
However, the analysis is not always mechanical. Depending on the wording of the contract, proof that a notice actually came to the attention of the intended recipient may sometimes become relevant even where the prescribed method was not followed exactly. Salestalk 598 (Pty) Ltd v Giant Eagle Trading CC concerned a lease-renewal notice transmitted through both WhatsApp and email, and the court treated actual electronic communication to the landlord’s director as legally significant in determining whether the option had been exercised.
The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (“ECTA”) provides an additional statutory framework. It gives legal recognition to data messages, electronic agreements, electronic expressions of intention and electronic signatures, while also regulating the time of dispatch and receipt of electronic communications.
The correct question is therefore not simply:
“Can I send contractual notice by WhatsApp?”
The better question is:
Does this contract permit this notice to be given electronically, does the communication satisfy the contractual requirements, and can I prove effective transmission or receipt if challenged?
Relevant long-tail search concepts include email contractual notice South Africa, WhatsApp contractual notice South Africa, notice of breach by email, cancellation by WhatsApp South Africa, ECTA contractual notices, domicilium email notice, electronic notice contract South Africa, proof of email receipt South Africa, WhatsApp cancellation of contract, and valid contractual notice requirements.
Why an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice Matters
Contractual notices frequently trigger serious legal consequences.
A notice of breach may start a ten-day remedy period.
A contractor’s notice may preserve a multimillion-rand extension-of-time claim.
A landlord’s notice may terminate a lease.
A tenant’s notice may exercise an option to renew.
A lender’s demand may trigger acceleration of a debt.
A notice of cancellation may bring future contractual obligations to an end.
A demand under a guarantee may cause an immediate payment obligation.
If the notice is invalid, the legal consequence that supposedly follows from it may never arise.
This creates a major distinction between ordinary business communication and contractual notice.
An email stating that a party is unhappy with performance does not necessarily constitute a contractual notice of breach.
A WhatsApp message stating “we cannot continue like this” does not necessarily cancel an agreement.
A monthly progress report discussing delay may not satisfy a clause requiring formal notice of a contractual claim.
The question is one of substance, contract and context.
The construction-law decision in Enviroserv Waste Management v Hawkins Hawkins and Osborne South (Pty) Ltd is instructive. The court dealt with whether correspondence constituted contractual notice under the relevant civil-engineering agreement and emphasised that the communication had to convey the relevant contractual circumstances sufficiently clearly to fulfil the purpose of the notice mechanism.
Accordingly, a contractual notice should ordinarily identify what happened, which contractual right is being exercised or preserved, and what consequence is intended to follow.
Start With the Contract’s Notice Clause
Before sending any important contractual notice, read the notice clause.
A well-drafted notice provision typically answers several questions.
It identifies which communications constitute formal notices.
It specifies whether notice may be delivered by hand, courier, registered post, email or another method.
It identifies the physical and electronic addresses chosen by each party.
It may state when a notice is deemed to have been received.
It may prescribe what happens if an email is sent outside business hours.
It may explain how a party changes its chosen notice address.
The provision may also distinguish ordinary operational correspondence from legally significant contractual notice.
These distinctions should be followed.
A recent example appears in Caterpillar Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Khulakanye Investments and Projects (Pty) Ltd, decided in June 2026. The agreement expressly permitted email notice and provided that a notice sent by email would be deemed received on the first business day following transmission, provided that it was received in legible form.
That contractual wording substantially simplifies the evidential enquiry.
The sender does not necessarily have to prove that a particular director personally opened the email at a particular time if the agreed deeming provision has been triggered.
By contrast, where email is not an agreed method, the sender may face a more difficult factual enquiry about actual receipt.
In Sekoati v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd and Others, the Gauteng High Court stated that where delivery did not occur according to the agreed contractual mechanism—for example where email was used even though email had not been agreed—the party relying on the notice would bear the onus of proving actual receipt.
The simplest practical rule is therefore:
Use the method stated in the contract even if another communication method appears faster or more convenient.
Where the stakes are high, sending through more than one permitted channel may provide additional evidential protection.
ECTA and an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice
ECTA creates the statutory foundation for much of South Africa’s electronic contracting environment.
Section 22 provides that an agreement is not without legal force merely because it was concluded wholly or partly through data messages. The section also regulates when and where an electronically concluded agreement is formed.
Section 23 deals with dispatch and receipt.
A data message used in concluding or performing an agreement is regarded as sent when it enters an information system outside the originator’s control. It is regarded as received when the complete message enters an information system designated or used by the addressee for that purpose and is capable of being retrieved and processed.
Section 24 is particularly relevant to contractual notices.
It provides that, as between the originator and addressee, an expression of intention or other statement is not without legal effect merely because it is contained in a data message or because intention is evidenced electronically rather than through a traditional signature.
This means that electronic form alone does not invalidate a contractual communication.
However, ECTA does not mean that every electronic message satisfies every contractual notice provision.
Contractual autonomy remains important.
If the parties specifically agree how communications must be given and received, their contractual provisions must be considered alongside ECTA.
This is why a message can be legally recognisable as a data message but still fail as a particular contractual notice because it was sent to the wrong person, through the wrong channel or without the content required by the agreement.
Electronic validity and contractual compliance are related but different questions.
Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice: When an Email Can Be Valid
Email is generally the easier electronic notice mechanism because sophisticated commercial agreements increasingly identify email addresses expressly.
Where email is permitted, the sender should comply literally with the contractual mechanism.
If the agreement requires notice to both the chief executive officer and the contract manager, copying only one may be insufficient.
If a specific notices address such as legalnotices@company.co.za is nominated, sending the email only to an operational employee may create avoidable difficulty.
If the contract requires a PDF signed by an authorised representative, a short email in the body of the message may not satisfy the agreed form.
Conversely, where the contract merely requires written notice to a designated email address, an email may readily satisfy that requirement.
The Supreme Court of Appeal’s decision in Spring Forest Trading 599 CC v Wilberry (Pty) Ltd t/a Ecowash demonstrates how substantial legal consequences can arise through email.
The agreement required consensual cancellation to be in writing and signed by the parties. The SCA held that the exchange of emails in that matter satisfied the contractual writing and signature requirements when ECTA was applied.
The case is important beyond non-variation clauses.
It demonstrates that South African law does not automatically treat email communication as legally inferior to paper communication.
However, Spring Forest should not be misunderstood as saying that every email amounts to a binding notice.
The communication must still satisfy the substantive and procedural requirements relevant to the right being exercised.
WhatsApp Messages, Consent and Context
WhatsApp can have contractual consequences, but the platform does not determine those consequences.
The message must still be interpreted objectively and in context.
The Supreme Court of Appeal addressed WhatsApp directly in Kgopana v Matlala.
The issue was whether a WhatsApp message constituted an enforceable contractual offer. The SCA held that, viewed in context and according to its content, the message did not demonstrate the necessary intention to contract.
That decision is particularly useful because it corrects a common misconception.
The law does not say:
“A WhatsApp message is binding.”
Nor does it say:
“A WhatsApp message is informal and can never be binding.”
The legal question is what the message objectively communicates and whether the requirements of the relevant legal transaction have been satisfied.
The same principle applies to notices.
A WhatsApp message stating:
“Please remember to pay us.”
may not constitute a contractual breach notice requiring payment within seven days failing cancellation.
A message stating:
“Pursuant to clause 14.2 of the agreement, you are hereby notified that you are in breach by failing to pay invoice 784. You are required to remedy the breach within seven business days, failing which we reserve our contractual rights to cancel”
is materially different.
However, content alone does not solve the problem if the contract requires notice at another address or by another method.
Taljaard v Barnard illustrates the danger. A party had communicated complaints through WhatsApp, but the underlying agreement prescribed written notice by prepaid registered post or hand delivery. The court distinguished that WhatsApp communication from the formal notice procedure required under the contract.
WhatsApp is therefore useful evidence, but whether it is effective contractual notice depends upon the agreement.
Domicilium and an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice
A domicilium citandi et executandi is an address chosen contractually for service of notices, process or other communications.
Its purpose is to provide certainty.
Where a contract provides that notices must be delivered to a chosen physical domicilium, the sender ordinarily obtains protection by using that address in accordance with the contractual provision.
An email sent elsewhere is not automatically equivalent.
That was the essential lesson in Bowley Steels v 10 Sterling Road. The court stated that where email delivery and the relevant email address had not been agreed, delivery of a notice by email was not the same as delivery to the chosen physical domicilium.
The significance is practical.
Suppose a lease states:
“All notices shall be delivered by hand or registered post to the domicilium addresses set out below.”
The tenant sends an email notifying the landlord that it exercises an option to renew.
The landlord later denies receiving the email and argues that the option expired.
The tenant has created an unnecessary dispute.
If the contract had instead stated that notices may be given at both the chosen physical address and designated email address, the position could be substantially stronger.
The parties should also distinguish domicilium for legal process from a more general address for contractual communications where the agreement itself makes that distinction.
The precise drafting matters more than the label.
Actual Receipt, Deemed Receipt and Proof
Three concepts should be separated:
Transmission, actual receipt, and deemed receipt.
Transmission refers to sending the communication.
Actual receipt concerns whether the notice genuinely reached the intended recipient or its appropriate information system.
Deemed receipt is a contractual or statutory rule under which receipt is treated as having occurred at a particular time once specified requirements are satisfied.
An agreement may state that email notice is deemed received on the next business day after transmission.
Another may state that delivery by hand is effective immediately.
Registered post may be deemed received after a specified number of business days.
These provisions reduce factual uncertainty.
ECTA also contains default rules addressing dispatch and receipt of data messages. Section 23 treats a complete electronic message as received when it enters an information system designated or used by the addressee for that purpose and can be retrieved and processed.
However, a contractual deeming clause should always be examined before relying solely upon the statutory default.
The sender should preserve evidence.
For email, that can include the sent message, complete headers where relevant, delivery confirmations, replies and server records.
For WhatsApp, useful evidence can include the message history, timestamps, delivery indicators, replies and exported chat records.
A screenshot is useful, but an isolated screenshot can be challenged.
It may omit context.
It may not show the relevant telephone number.
It may not establish who controlled the account at the relevant time.
For high-value disputes, the original electronic record should therefore be preserved.
In Salestalk, the alleged notice of renewal was transmitted both by WhatsApp and email. The evidential dispute regarding receipt became central, and the absence of a supporting affidavit from the director said to have received the messages affected the factual assessment.
Proof strategy therefore matters almost as much as sending strategy.
Breach, Cancellation and an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice
Notices of breach and cancellation require particular care because an invalid notice may make a later cancellation unlawful.
Suppose the contract provides that if either party commits a material breach, the innocent party may give written notice requiring remedy within ten business days.
The notice must do enough to engage that clause.
It should identify the breach with reasonable clarity.
It should state what must be done to remedy it.
It should provide the contractual cure period.
It should comply with the required delivery mechanism.
Only after the cure period expires without proper remedy should the innocent party exercise the cancellation right where that is what the contract provides.
Cancellation itself must ordinarily be communicated.
A message that merely threatens future cancellation is not necessarily the same as an unequivocal election to cancel.
The Taljaard decision recognised the central role of communication in contractual cancellation and confirmed the cancellation in that case after the prescribed notice procedure had been followed.
Construction contracts create similar risks.
A notice preserving a claim may have to identify a contractual event within a strict period.
A principal agent’s instruction may have to be in a prescribed form.
An employer’s termination notice may have to follow an antecedent breach notice.
The older but useful Enviroserv decision illustrates that the court will examine the substance and purpose of the alleged notice rather than accept any project letter as sufficient merely because it discusses the event in question.
For critical notices, a formal document attached to an email is usually safer than an informal conversational message.
The covering email should identify the document expressly as contractual notice and state the clause relied upon.
Evidence, Authentication and Practical Steps
An electronic notice should be administered with litigation in mind even where litigation is not anticipated.
The sender should use the contractual address.
The correct recipient should be identified.
The subject line should indicate that the communication is a formal contractual notice where appropriate.
The notice should refer to the agreement and relevant clause.
It should identify the event or breach.
Any deadline should be calculated carefully.
The sender should retain evidence of dispatch and delivery.
If the contract allows multiple channels, transmitting the same notice through more than one authorised method may provide useful protection.
Where WhatsApp is used, the sender should confirm that the telephone number belongs to the relevant authorised representative.
A reply acknowledging the notice can become powerful evidence of actual receipt.
Authority must also be considered.
Section 25 of ECTA provides rules for attribution of a data message, including where it is sent personally by the originator, by someone with authority to act for the originator, or through an appropriately programmed information system.
An employee’s email address does not automatically prove that the employee has authority to cancel a R100 million contract.
The contract and corporate delegations should therefore be checked.
Similarly, notice should be distinguished from negotiation.
Parties sometimes add phrases such as “without prejudice” to correspondence without understanding their effect. The label does not automatically determine whether a communication can be relied upon as a contractual notice, and genuinely privileged settlement communications raise different evidential considerations.
The safest approach is to keep formal contractual notice separate from settlement negotiations where both are occurring simultaneously.
Conclusion: Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice
An Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice can be legally valid in South Africa.
Electronic communications are recognised by ECTA, and South African courts have repeatedly recognised that emails and other data messages can produce significant contractual consequences. Spring Forest confirms that email can even satisfy contractual requirements of writing and signature in appropriate circumstances.
However, electronic recognition does not override the contract.
The agreement remains the starting point.
Where the parties have prescribed a particular method of notice, that method should be followed.
Bowley Steels demonstrates that sending an email is not necessarily equivalent to delivery at a nominated physical domicilium where email was never agreed as a notice mechanism.
Where the prescribed method is not followed, proof of actual receipt may become decisive. Sekoati expressly recognises that a sender using an unagreed electronic method may bear the burden of proving actual receipt.
WhatsApp must be treated with similar care.
Kgopana v Matlala demonstrates that the legal effect of a WhatsApp message depends upon its objective content and context, while Taljaard v Barnard illustrates that WhatsApp communication will not necessarily substitute for a formal notice mechanism prescribed by the parties.
The safest practical approach is therefore to ask five questions before sending an important notice:
What does the contract require?
Who must send the notice?
To whom must it be sent?
What must the notice say?
When will it legally be regarded as received?
If those questions are answered before the message is transmitted, the risk of an otherwise valid contractual claim being defeated by a notice technicality can be substantially reduced.
What Is an Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice?
An Email or WhatsApp Contractual Notice is an electronic communication intended to exercise or preserve a right under an existing contract.
Examples include notices of breach, demands to remedy, cancellations, renewal notices, construction claims and notices exercising contractual options.
Its validity depends upon both the applicable legal principles and the wording of the contract.
Is an Email a Valid Contractual Notice in South Africa?
Yes, potentially.
ECTA recognises data messages and gives legal effect to electronic communications.
However, the agreement must be checked.
If the contract permits email notice, compliance is generally more straightforward. If the agreement requires another form of delivery, the sender may need to establish actual receipt or face an argument that the notice was invalid.
Is a WhatsApp Message a Valid Contractual Notice?
It can be, but not automatically.
The contract must permit the form of communication expressly or sufficiently broadly, or the factual circumstances must otherwise establish legal effectiveness.
Kgopana v Matlala confirms that WhatsApp communications are interpreted according to their content and context rather than being automatically binding merely because they were sent electronically.
Can I Give Notice of Breach by Email?
Yes, where email is permitted by the agreement or where the notice is otherwise legally effective under the applicable contractual and statutory framework.
The notice must still satisfy the content requirements.
If the contract requires ten business days to remedy a specified breach, an email that simply complains about performance may not be sufficient.
Can I Cancel a Contract by WhatsApp?
Potentially, but this is risky unless the contract clearly permits WhatsApp or electronic notice.
Where the contract prescribes another notice procedure, that procedure should be followed.
Taljaard v Barnard illustrates circumstances where WhatsApp communication did not substitute for the written contractual notice method prescribed by the agreement.
Does ECTA Make Every Email Legally Binding?
No.
ECTA removes objections based merely upon electronic form and regulates electronic transactions, signatures, intention, dispatch and receipt.
It does not transform every informal email into a contract or contractual notice.
Ordinary requirements of agreement, contractual compliance, authority and intention remain relevant.
When Is an Email Deemed to Have Been Received?
The answer may be determined by the contract.
For example, the agreement considered in Caterpillar Financial Services v Khulakanye Investments expressly provided that email notice would be deemed received on the first business day after transmission, provided that the email was received in legible form.
Where the contract does not regulate the issue, section 23 of ECTA may become relevant.
What Does ECTA Say About Receipt of Electronic Messages?
Section 23 provides that a data message is regarded as received when the complete message enters an information system designated or used by the addressee for that purpose and is capable of being retrieved and processed.
Contractual provisions concerning receipt should nevertheless be considered first.
What If I Sent Notice to the Wrong Email Address?
The notice may be invalid.
If the agreement identifies a designated contractual email address, use that address.
Where an incorrect or unagreed email address is used, the sender may have to prove that the notice actually reached the appropriate recipient and may still face an argument based upon non-compliance with the contractual mechanism. Sekoati illustrates the importance of actual receipt where an agreed method was not used.
What Is a Domicilium Address?
A domicilium is an address contractually selected for service of notices, legal process or communications, depending upon the wording of the agreement.
Its purpose is to create certainty regarding delivery.
Where the agreement specifies a physical domicilium and does not permit electronic notice, an email may not constitute equivalent delivery. Bowley Steels is useful authority on this point.
Can Actual Receipt Save a Notice Sent by the Wrong Method?
Sometimes, depending upon the wording of the contract and the nature of the notice.
South African cases demonstrate that actual receipt can become relevant where the contractual method was not followed precisely.
However, this should not be treated as permission to disregard the notice clause.
Salestalk illustrates how actual receipt of email and WhatsApp communications can become central to the factual enquiry.
Does a WhatsApp Blue Tick Prove Legal Receipt?
It may be useful evidence, but it should not automatically be treated as conclusive proof of contractual receipt.
The court may still need to determine who controlled the device, whether the message was complete, whether the correct person received it and whether the contract required delivery through that channel.
Replies and surrounding communication can strengthen proof.
Can an Email Satisfy a Requirement That a Document Be Signed?
Potentially.
In Spring Forest Trading v Wilberry, the SCA held that the email communications before it satisfied the relevant contractual writing and signature requirements when ECTA was applied.
The result depends upon the particular contractual or statutory signature requirement.
Should Formal Contractual Notices Be Sent by More Than One Method?
Where the contract permits it, doing so can be sensible.
For example, a party might deliver the notice to the physical domicilium and simultaneously email it to the designated contractual address.
The additional transmission should supplement rather than replace compliance with the mandatory contractual procedure.
What Should a Contractual Notice by Email Contain?
A significant notice should ordinarily identify the parties and agreement, refer to the relevant contractual clause, describe the event or breach, state the right being exercised, identify any required remedial action, specify the applicable deadline and reserve appropriate rights.
The required content remains contract-specific.
References
| Legal authority | Substance | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002, particularly sections 11, 12, 13 and 21–26 | ECTA provides legal recognition to data messages and electronic signatures and regulates electronic formation of agreements, dispatch, receipt, expression of intention and attribution of electronic communications. Section 23 addresses dispatch and receipt, while section 24 confirms that an expression of intention is not without legal force merely because it is contained in a data message. | ECTA provides the primary statutory framework for determining the legal effect of electronic contractual communications in South Africa. It establishes that electronic form alone does not invalidate a notice, while leaving the contractual requirements themselves critically important. |
| Spring Forest Trading 599 CC v Wilberry (Pty) Ltd t/a Ecowash and Another (725/13) [2014] ZASCA 178 | The parties’ agreement required consensual cancellation to be in writing and signed. The SCA held that the exchange of emails satisfied those formal requirements in the circumstances when ECTA was applied. | This is the leading South African appellate authority demonstrating that an email exchange can satisfy formal contractual writing and signature requirements. It is essential when evaluating whether electronic communication can constitute formal contractual action. |
| Kgopana v Matlala (1081/2018) [2019] ZASCA 174 | The SCA considered whether a WhatsApp message constituted a contractual offer. It held that the message, interpreted according to its content and context, did not convey the necessary intention to contract. | The case is important because it demonstrates that WhatsApp messages are not inherently binding or non-binding. Their legal effect depends upon objective intention, content and context. The same analytical caution applies to alleged contractual notices. |
| Bowley Steels (Pty) Ltd v 10 Sterling Road (Pty) Ltd and Another (2016/2461) [2017] ZAGPJHC 196 | The High Court considered whether email delivery satisfied a contractual notice requirement linked to a chosen physical domicilium. The Court stated that unless email delivery and the relevant email address had been agreed, email delivery was not equivalent to delivery at the physical domicilium. | This is an important practical authority demonstrating that ECTA does not simply override a contractually selected method of notice. Parties should use the address and method actually prescribed by their agreement. |
| Taljaard v Barnard and Another (1050/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 133 | The agreement prescribed written notice through registered post or hand delivery. One party instead relied upon WhatsApp communications concerning alleged breach. The court distinguished those communications from the stipulated notice process and confirmed cancellation after the proper contractual procedure was followed. | The case demonstrates the risk of assuming that WhatsApp automatically substitutes for an agreed formal notice mechanism. |
| Salestalk 598 (Pty) Ltd v Giant Eagle Trading CC (2021/53855) [2023] ZAGPJHC 599 | The dispute concerned exercise of a lease-renewal option. The lessee alleged that written notice had been sent by WhatsApp to a director and by email. Receipt and the relationship between those electronic communications and the contractual domicilium provisions were central to the dispute. | The case demonstrates that actual electronic receipt may become significant even where a domicilium clause exists, depending upon the contract’s wording and evidence. It also highlights the evidential importance of proving who received the message. |
| Sekoati v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd and Others (36232/2013) [2025] ZAGPPHC 198; 2025 (5) SA 581 (GP) | The High Court discussed contractual domicilium and delivery of notices and stated that where an agreed method of delivery is not followed—for example where email is used without agreement—the sender bears the burden of proving actual receipt. | This recent authority provides useful guidance on the evidential consequences of departing from a contractually agreed notice method. |
| Caterpillar Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Khulakanye Investments and Projects (Pty) Ltd (2024/128008) [2026] ZAGPJHC 617 | The contract expressly permitted notice by email and included a deeming provision under which an email was regarded as received on the first business day following transmission, provided that it was received in legible form. | The case is a useful recent illustration of how carefully drafted electronic notice and deemed-receipt provisions can substantially reduce uncertainty concerning when contractual communication becomes effective. |
| Enviroserv Waste Management v Hawkins Hawkins and Osborne South (Pty) Ltd (CA95/2006) [2007] ZAECHC 56 | The court considered whether project correspondence constituted valid contractual notice under a civil-engineering agreement. The enquiry focused on whether the communication conveyed the circumstances and contractual claim sufficiently clearly to fulfil the purpose of the notice mechanism. | The case demonstrates that the validity of contractual notice concerns substance as well as delivery. An email sent to the correct address may still fail if it does not communicate what the contract requires the notice to communicate. |
Useful Links
Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 – South African Government provides official access to ECTA, including the statutory rules governing data messages, electronic signatures, agreements and electronic communications. It is the essential statutory starting point for analysing electronic contractual notices.
Supreme Court of Appeal – Kgopana v Matlala provides the SCA judgment dealing directly with the contractual significance of a WhatsApp communication and the importance of objective intention and context.
Southern African Legal Information Institute provides free access to South African decisions dealing with electronic communications, domicilium clauses, contractual cancellation, options and notice requirements.
If you would like to know what to do if you have been blasklisted click here.
If you would like to know more about what debt collectors are not permitted to do click here.
Or if you would like to know more about bankruptcy law click here.
If you would like to know more about how estate planning effects collections follow the links below:
If your query relates to ante-nuptial contracts click here.
If your query relates to post-nuptial contracts click here.
If you would like to know more about your rights under the national credit act click here.
If you would like to know more about how to dispute a municipal account click here.
This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for errors, omissions, loss, or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Don’t hesitate to contact Meyer and Partners Attorneys Incorporated if you require further information or specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE).