Do contracts require witnesses?

[neliusmit]

Hi to all the legal boffs.

I know that the law requires some contracts (such as a will and a marriage) to be signed by two witnesses.

But do other contracts - such as a loan or employment contract or a business agreement need to be signed by witnesses?

I have read that the purpose of witnesses only really comes into play if the person who signed the contract says that they did so under duress or claim that they did not sign ... and generally the witnesses are then untraceable as no other information appears other than their signatures ... which kind of makes it moot.

It is recommended that the witness will also print their names under their signatures. I make provision in my contracts for 2 witnesses together with their physical addresses, cell no, email and fax number should I wish to contact them in case of a dispute arising.

[Blurock]

When it comes to the Law, rather wear belt and braces. Make the process of providing proof as easy as possible. There are just too many loopholes and clever attorneys to risk taking a chance.

[Houses4Rent]

I know Blurock, but after hundreds of unchallenged contracts I am happy that our approach works.

[Dave A]

This discussion brings a thought to mind:

What is the legal status of a contract that legally requires a Revenue Stamp, but no Revenue Stamp has been affixed to the contract?

[Houses4Rent]

Hi Dave

I would think its invalid then. I am so glad stamp duty was abolished for leases some years back as it would cause us major headaches.

[neliusmit]

This discussion brings a thought to mind:

What is the legal status of a contract that legally requires a Revenue Stamp, but no Revenue Stamp has been affixed to the contract?

The ambit of the Stamp Duties Act which was introduced in 1968 has been steadily reduced over the last few years. Stamp duty only remains payable on leases of immovable property for periods longer than five years. Stamp duty that was previously payable on unlisted marketable securities in terms of the Stamp Duties Act is now payable in terms of the Securities Transfer Tax Act.The case for the abolition of stamp duty on long-term leases is very strong. Although the stamp duty is payable by the lessor, it is generally recovered from the lessee. The stamp duty is also payable at the time the lease is entered into, which results in a very unwelcome additional cash cost to any new business that commences trading at its new premises. Stamp duty has also become an outdated tax with the introduction of value- added tax (VAT), a more sophisticated consumption tax. Moreover, both stamp duty and VAT are payable on rentals even though there is no rationale for paying both these taxes.The Revenue Laws Amendment Act, 2008 which was signed into law on 8 January 2009 repeals the Stamp Duties Act and also repeals the remaining stamp duty on immovable property leases longer than five years.However, lessors should note that stamp duty on property leases will only be abolished from 1 April 2009, and all leases entered into prior to that date will still attract the duty. Therefore, where the lease has been entered into prior to 1 April 2009, stamp duty thereon will remain payable in terms of the Stamp Duties Act, and SARS may continue to enforce the provisions of the Act in respect of these leases even after the Act is repealed.