Ismail v Arar [2020] NAHCMD 369 (21 August 2020)

Ismail v Arar [2020] NAHCMD 369 (21 August 2020)

The respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving the existence of less drastic measures to satisfy the judgment, and the applicant demonstrated that all reasonable steps to execute against movables were taken. Therefore, the immovable property is declared executable.

Citation
[2020] NAHCMD 369
Parties
Applicant: Amir Ismail; Respondent: Mohamed Arar; Respondent: Another
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
21 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Judgment Application for Execution
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Execution of Judgment, Attachment of Immovable Property, Onus of Proof
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Property Law Execution of Judgment Attachment of Immovable Property Onus of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amir Ismail

Applicant

Mohamed Arar

Respondent

Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Judgment Application for Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the respondents' primary home declared executable to satisfy a judgment debt
  2. 2 Whether the respondents have demonstrated the existence of less drastic measures to satisfy the judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving the existence of less drastic measures to satisfy the judgment, and the applicant demonstrated that all reasonable steps to execute against movables were taken. Therefore, the immovable property is declared executable.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • The immovable property Erf No. 250, Rocky Crest (Extension No. 3), Windhoek, is declared executable.
  • The respondents to pay the costs of suit.