Kuiiri and Another v Kandjoze and Others (1) (PA 301 of 2006) [2007] NAHC 94 (30 October 2007)

Kuiiri and Another v Kandjoze and Others (1) (PA 301 of 2006) [2007] NAHC 94 (30 October 2007)

Applicants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they were in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the bottle store at a clearly definable time and failed to show when they were dispossessed by respondents; thus, they are not entitled to a spoliation order.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] NAHC 94
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Frans Kuiiri; Applicant: Angelika Kuiiri; Respondent: Obeth Mbuyipaha Kandjoze; Respondent: Kahoo Frieda W. Kandjoze; Respondent: Shafimana Ueitele
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
30 October 2007
Case Number
PA 301 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Finalisation of Rule Nisi (spoliation Order)
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Spoliation, Mandament Van Spolie, Possession, Restoration of Possession
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Property Law Spoliation Mandament Van Spolie Possession Restoration of Possession

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Frans Kuiiri

Applicant

Angelika Kuiiri

Applicant

Obeth Mbuyipaha Kandjoze

Respondent

Kahoo Frieda W. Kandjoze

Respondent

Shafimana Ueitele

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Ruling on Finalisation of Rule Nisi (spoliation Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants were in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the bottle store at the time of alleged spoliation
  2. 2 Whether applicants proved when they were dispossessed by respondents

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they were in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the bottle store at a clearly definable time and failed to show when they were dispossessed by respondents; thus, they are not entitled to a spoliation order.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to make final the rule nisi granted on 9 November 2006 is dismissed with costs.