Baron and Others v Claytile (Pty) Ltd and Another (21R/2014) [2016] ZALCC 17 (24 June 2016)

Baron and Others v Claytile (Pty) Ltd and Another (21R/2014) [2016] ZALCC 17 (24 June 2016)

The court found that the jurisdiction point in limine had been abandoned and conceded in the court a quo, making it inappropriate to revive it as a ground of appeal. The remaining grounds for leave to appeal related to matters on which the court had already made reasoned findings. After considering the submissions...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] ZALCC 17
Parties
Applicant: Isak Baron; Applicant: David Bailey; Applicant: Eric Cupido; Applicant: Jonathan Stoffels; Applicant: Richard Figland; Applicant: Anthony Merrington; Applicant: Any other persons currently residing at Claytile Joostenberg Brick, Hercules Pilaar Road, Muldersvlei with or through the above respondents whose name and identities are unknown to the applicant; Respondent: Claytile (Pty) Limited; Respondent: City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 June 2016
Case Number
21R/2014
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal is dismissed.
Judges
Meer, Carelse
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Alternative Accommodation, Jurisdiction, Responsibility for Housing
Land and Property Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Alternative Accommodation Jurisdiction Responsibility for Housing

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isak Baron

Applicant

David Bailey

Applicant

Eric Cupido

Applicant

Jonathan Stoffels

Applicant

Richard Figland

Applicant

Anthony Merrington

Applicant

Any other persons currently residing at Claytile Joostenberg Brick, Hercules Pilaar Road, Muldersvlei with or through the above respondents whose name and identities are unknown to the applicant

Applicant

Claytile (Pty) Limited

Respondent

City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the judgment of 23 March 2016.
  2. 2 Whether the jurisdiction point in limine can be revived as a ground of appeal.
  3. 3 Whether there is a reasonable prospect of success on appeal regarding alternative accommodation and responsibility for housing.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the jurisdiction point in limine had been abandoned and conceded in the court a quo, making it inappropriate to revive it as a ground of appeal. The remaining grounds for leave to appeal related to matters on which the court had already made reasoned findings. After considering the submissions regarding alternative accommodation and the responsibility for housing, the court concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different decision. Accordingly, leave to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is dismissed.