Breed v Heaven on Earth Commercial Farming (Pty) Ltd (44763/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 300 (8 March 2016)

Breed v Heaven on Earth Commercial Farming (Pty) Ltd (44763/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 300 (8 March 2016)

The respondent repeatedly breached the payment obligations under the sale and lease agreements. The lease agreement contained clear non-waiver and non-variation clauses, which preclude any amendment or waiver unless reduced to writing and signed by both parties. The respondent's defences, including alleged representations, waiver, estoppel, and option to purchase, were raised only after the fact and are not supported by the evidence or the contractual terms. There is no evidence that the required consent for sub-division was obtained or that the option to purchase was validly exercised. The court finds that the respondent has no sustainable defence to resist eviction, and the applicant is...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 300
Parties
Applicant: Casper Jan Hendrik Breed; Respondent: Heaven on Earth Commercial Farming (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 March 2016
Case Number
44763/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / First Instance
Outcome
Application granted; respondent and all persons occupying through it are evicted from the property.
Judges
H J Fabricius
Legal Topics
Eviction, Lease Agreement, Non Variation Clause, Waiver, Option to Purchase
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Lease Agreement Non Variation Clause Waiver Option to Purchase

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Casper Jan Hendrik Breed

Applicant

Heaven on Earth Commercial Farming (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is in unlawful occupation of the property following cancellation of the lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has any sustainable defence to resist eviction, including waiver, estoppel, or alleged misrepresentation.
  3. 3 Whether the non-variation and non-waiver clauses in the agreements preclude the respondent's defences.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent repeatedly breached the payment obligations under the sale and lease agreements. The lease agreement contained clear non-waiver and non-variation clauses, which preclude any amendment or waiver unless reduced to writing and signed by both parties. The respondent's defences, including alleged representations, waiver, estoppel, and option to purchase, were raised only after the fact and are not supported by the evidence or the contractual terms. There is no evidence that the required consent for sub-division was obtained or that the option to purchase was validly exercised. The court finds that the respondent has no sustainable defence to resist eviction, and the applicant is...

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondent and all persons occupying through it are evicted from the property.

Orders

  • Respondent and all persons occupying through it are evicted from the remaining extent of Portion 7 of the farm Rondawel 22, District Marble Hall, and must vacate within 30 days from the date of this order.
  • Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of this application on the scale as between attorney and client.