Alana v Monoline Investments 8 Trust (2020/37977) [2025] ZAGPJHC 47 (23 January 2025)

Alana v Monoline Investments 8 Trust (2020/37977) [2025] ZAGPJHC 47 (23 January 2025)

The court held that it does not have the power to make a settlement agreement an order of court where the agreement was concluded prior to the commencement of litigation and does not relate to a pending lis between the parties. The applicant's additional claim for a money order was dismissed as it was not sought in the notice of motion or founding affidavit, and no supporting evidence was adduced. The application was accordingly dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 47
Parties
Applicant: Alana Marjory Joyce; Respondent: Monoline Investments 8 Trust
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Case Number
2020/37977
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment After Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Dlamini
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Housing Development Schemes for Retired Persons Act, Jurisdiction of High Court, Life Rights Agreement
Civil Procedure Land and Property Settlement Agreement Enforcement Housing Development Schemes for Retired Persons Act Jurisdiction of High Court Life Rights Agreement

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alana Marjory Joyce

Applicant

Monoline Investments 8 Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment After Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a settlement agreement concluded prior to litigation can be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a money order for payment not claimed in the notice of motion.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it does not have the power to make a settlement agreement an order of court where the agreement was concluded prior to the commencement of litigation and does not relate to a pending lis between the parties. The applicant's additional claim for a money order was dismissed as it was not sought in the notice of motion or founding affidavit, and no supporting evidence was adduced. The application was accordingly dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The order marked 'X' signed on 10 June 2024 is made an order of this court.