Abdul v Williams and Others (CA227/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 103 (29 October 2019)

Abdul v Williams and Others (CA227/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 103 (29 October 2019)

The court held that the sale and transfer of the state-subsidised property within the eight-year restriction period, without the written consent of the relevant Provincial Housing Department, was strictly prohibited by section 10A of the Housing Act. Both the initial sale agreement and the subsequent lease agreement between the appellant and the first and second respondents were concluded in contravention of the statutory restriction and were therefore null and void. The appellant did not acquire any rights in the property, either as purchaser or tenant. The subsequent sale and transfer to the third respondent, although also problematic, did not vest any rights in the appellant. The court...

Citation
[2019] ZAECGHC 103
Parties
Appellant: Nadia Abdul; Respondent: Benjamin Cecil Williams; Respondent: Angela Williams; Respondent: Colin Abel Persensie; Respondent: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds, Cape Town
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 October 2019
Case Number
CA227/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Revelas, J W Eksteen, M Rusa
Legal Topics
Housing Act Section 10a, State Subsidised Property, Restrictive Conditions, Nullity of Sale, Alienation of Property
Land and Property Civil Procedure Housing Act Section 10a State Subsidised Property Restrictive Conditions Nullity of Sale Alienation of Property

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nadia Abdul

Appellant

Benjamin Cecil Williams

Respondent

Angela Williams

Respondent

Colin Abel Persensie

Respondent

Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds, Cape Town

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sale and transfer of a state-subsidised property within the eight-year restriction period under section 10A of the Housing Act is valid.
  2. 2 Whether the agreements between the appellant and the first and second respondents were enforceable or constituted a nullity.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant acquired any rights in the property as purchaser or tenant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the sale and transfer of the state-subsidised property within the eight-year restriction period, without the written consent of the relevant Provincial Housing Department, was strictly prohibited by section 10A of the Housing Act. Both the initial sale agreement and the subsequent lease agreement between the appellant and the first and second respondents were concluded in contravention of the statutory restriction and were therefore null and void. The appellant did not acquire any rights in the property, either as purchaser or tenant. The subsequent sale and transfer to the third respondent, although also problematic, did not vest any rights in the appellant. The court...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The Registrar is directed to ensure that a copy of this judgment is served on the Eastern Cape Provincial Office of the Legal Practice Council in East London.