Beaulieu Country Estate v Leogem Property Projects Proprietary Limited and Others (70858/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 594 (20 November 2019)
The court found that the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the relief sought and did not demonstrate that the respondents acted unlawfully or without proper authorisation. The application was not urgent and the requirements for an interdict were not met. Accordingly, the application was dismissed with...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] ZAGPPHC 594
- Parties
- Applicant: Beaulieu Country Estate; Respondent: Leogem Property Projects Proprietary Limited; Respondent: Imbrilinx CC t/a Leap Landscape Architects and Environmental Planners; Respondent: Johannesburg Water (SOC) Limited; Respondent: MEC: Department of Agriculture and Rural Development; Respondent: Regional Director: Gauteng Department of Water and Sanitation; Respondent: Regional Director: North-West Department of Water and Sanitation
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 70858/2019
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Order Delivered After Hearing
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel for first and second respondents.
- Judges
- S. Potterill
- Legal Topics
- Interdict, Municipal Services, Environmental Authorisation
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Beaulieu Country Estate
Applicant
Leogem Property Projects Proprietary Limited
Respondent
Imbrilinx CC t/a Leap Landscape Architects and Environmental Planners
Respondent
Johannesburg Water (SOC) Limited
Respondent
MEC: Department of Agriculture and Rural Development
Respondent
Regional Director: Gauteng Department of Water and Sanitation
Respondent
Regional Director: North-West Department of Water and Sanitation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Order Delivered After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to the relief sought against the respondents.
- 2 Whether the respondents acted lawfully in relation to the property and water services.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the relief sought and did not demonstrate that the respondents acted unlawfully or without proper authorisation. The application was not urgent and the requirements for an interdict were not met. Accordingly, the application was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel for the first and second respondents.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel for first and second respondents.
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- The applicant is to pay the first and second respondents' costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
48 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
(1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED
Case Number: 70858/2019
20/11/2019
In the matter between:
BEAULIEU COUNTRY ESTATE
Applicant
and
LEOGEM PROPERTY PROJECTS PROPRIETARY
LIMITED
First Respondent
IMBRILINX CC T/A LEAP LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS
Second Respondent
JOHANNESBURG WATER (SOC) LIMITED
Third Respondent
MEC: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Fourth Respondent
REGIONAL DIRECTOR: GAUTENG DEPARTMENT
OF WATER AND SANITATION
Fifth Respondent
REGIONAL DIRECTOR: NORTH-WEST DEPARTMENT
OF WATER AND SANITATION
Sixth Respondent
ORDER
POTTERILL J
[1] The application is dismissed.
[2] The applicant is to carry the first and second respondent's costs, including the costs of two counsel.
S. POTTERILL
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
CASE NO:
70858/2019
HEARD ON:
13 November 2019
FOR THE APPLICANT:
ADV. C.F. VAN DER MERWE SC
INSTRUCTED BY:
Bishop Fraser Incorporated
FOR THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS: ADV. M.M. RIP SC
ADV. M. MAJOZI
INSTRUCTED BY:
Ivan Pauw & Partners Attorneys
DATE OF ORDER:
20 November 2019