Booysen and Another v City of Cape Town and Others (17673/2022) [2024] ZAWCHC 134 (20 May 2024)

Booysen and Another v City of Cape Town and Others (17673/2022) [2024] ZAWCHC 134 (20 May 2024)

The application was dismissed primarily because it was brought outside the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, and the applicants failed to seek condonation or an extension under section 9. The applicants did not provide any explanation for the lengthy delay, which is a prerequisite for the court to exercise its discretion in their favour. Even if the merits were considered, the applicants failed to establish any procedural irregularity or legal entitlement to the property. The City of Cape Town followed its Unlawful Occupation Policy and Housing Policy, and the applicants did not qualify as beneficiaries or lawful tenants. The procedure adopted by the City was not shown to...

Citation
[2024] ZAWCHC 134
Parties
Applicant: Anna Booysen; Applicant: Veronica Booysen; Respondent: City of Cape Town; Respondent: The Office of the Deeds Registrar, Cape Town; Respondent: Anthony Booysen; Respondent: Charmaine Linda Booysen
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 May 2024
Case Number
17673/2022
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
J Cloete
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Unlawful Occupation Policy, Locus Standi, Delay and Condonation, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Unlawful Occupation Policy Locus Standi Delay and Condonation Procedural Fairness

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anna Booysen

Applicant

Veronica Booysen

Applicant

City of Cape Town

Respondent

The Office of the Deeds Registrar, Cape Town

Respondent

Anthony Booysen

Respondent

Charmaine Linda Booysen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for review was brought within the time limits prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to condonation or extension under section 9 of PAJA for the delay.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have locus standi to challenge the lease and transfer of the property.

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed primarily because it was brought outside the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, and the applicants failed to seek condonation or an extension under section 9. The applicants did not provide any explanation for the lengthy delay, which is a prerequisite for the court to exercise its discretion in their favour. Even if the merits were considered, the applicants failed to establish any procedural irregularity or legal entitlement to the property. The City of Cape Town followed its Unlawful Occupation Policy and Housing Policy, and the applicants did not qualify as beneficiaries or lawful tenants. The procedure adopted by the City was not shown to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party shall pay their own costs.