Buttner v van Wyk and Others (12094/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 212 (20 August 2024)
The court found that the applicant lawfully terminated the lease and the first respondent has no legal entitlement to remain in occupation. The respondent's claims regarding her inability to secure alternative accommodation and her alleged health issues were unsubstantiated. The court determined that section 4(6) of PIE applied, as the period of unlawful occupation was less than six months at the time of application. The interests of the minor child were considered, but the respondent failed to demonstrate any specific prejudice to the child's education or well-being. The court concluded that eviction is just and equitable, but set the vacation date after the school year to minimize...
- Citation
- [2024] ZAWCHC 212
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter John Buttner; Respondent: Charlene Megan van Wyk; Respondent: All persons occupying the property registered as erf 1[…], Durbanville, known as Z[…], Building No. […], Unit 6[…], B[…] Road, Durbanville, Cape Town, Western Cape Province, through the first respondent; Respondent: Durbanville Municipality
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 20 August 2024
- Case Number
- 12094/2024
- Procedural Posture
- Eviction Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Eviction granted; respondents to vacate property by 17 December 2024, failing which eviction may be carried out on 19 December 2024. Costs awarded to applicant.
- Judges
- P Farlam
- Legal Topics
- Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Just and Equitable Eviction, Unlawful Occupation, Best Interests of Child, Costs Award
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Peter John Buttner
Applicant
Charlene Megan van Wyk
Respondent
All persons occupying the property registered as erf 1[…], Durbanville, known as Z[…], Building No. […], Unit 6[…], B[…] Road, Durbanville, Cape Town, Western Cape Province, through the first respondent
Respondent
Durbanville Municipality
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the eviction of the first respondent and her minor child from the property is just and equitable under section 4 of PIE.
- 2 What is a just and equitable date for the vacation or eviction of the property by the respondents.
- 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to costs, including costs of interlocutory applications and postponements.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant lawfully terminated the lease and the first respondent has no legal entitlement to remain in occupation. The respondent's claims regarding her inability to secure alternative accommodation and her alleged health issues were unsubstantiated. The court determined that section 4(6) of PIE applied, as the period of unlawful occupation was less than six months at the time of application. The interests of the minor child were considered, but the respondent failed to demonstrate any specific prejudice to the child's education or well-being. The court concluded that eviction is just and equitable, but set the vacation date after the school year to minimize...
Court Disposition
Eviction granted; respondents to vacate property by 17 December 2024, failing which eviction may be carried out on 19 December 2024. Costs awarded to applicant.
Orders
- The first respondent and all other persons occupying the property registered as erf 1[…], Durbanville and known as Z[…], Building No. […], Unit 6[…], B[…] Road, Durbanville, Cape Town, through the first respondent, are hereby evicted from the property.
- The occupiers must vacate the property on or before Tuesday, 17 December 2024.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment