Cradle City 528 (Pty) Ltd v Mabilo and Others (LCC143/09) [2014] ZALCC 19 (29 January 2014)

Cradle City 528 (Pty) Ltd v Mabilo and Others (LCC143/09) [2014] ZALCC 19 (29 January 2014)

The court refused the application to strike out the affidavit delivered by the occupiers in response to the rule nisi. The judge found that the affidavit was not an answering affidavit but a response to the rule nisi, which is intended to allow affected parties to show cause why the proposed order should not be made. Rule 32(2) does not apply to such affidavits. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that occupiers are properly notified and represented, especially in eviction matters under ESTA, and that the applicant's insistence on striking out the affidavit was misplaced. The court further noted that the applicant was warned about the lack of merit in its application but...

Citation
[2014] ZALCC 19
Parties
Applicant: Cradle City 528 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Allan Mabilo; Respondent: Molungisi Zuma; Respondent: Albert Zimba; Respondent: Edward Ratau; Respondent: Ali Sehaswane; Respondent: Sydney Tswi; Respondent: Norman Mashamatie; Respondent: Bongeni Zuma; Respondent: Keletso Molea; Respondent: Godfrey Molatsi; Respondent: Colbert Litepo; Respondent: Maria Njkweni; Respondent: Lovemore Banda; Respondent: Emmanual Mancho; Respondent: Joseph Skhona; Respondent: Gloria Stofile; Respondent: Moses Masila; Respondent: Mavis Dube; Respondent: Manala Mahlangu; Respondent: Wilfred Ramane; Respondent: Zodwa Mosime; Respondent: Vickson Sithole; Respondent: Seun Mthambo; Respondent: Donald Milanzi; Respondent: Vanlotten Mkhwanazi; Respondent: Jim Mdomu; Respondent: Bongo Qwabi; Respondent: Mpule Ramela; Respondent: Jonathan Chibwe; Respondent: Maria Masumboka; Respondent: Sootho Motsoeneng; Respondent: Eric Msane; Respondent: Matome Relela; Respondent: Johannes Malatsi; Respondent: Ramaruro Freddie; Respondent: Motsumi (Mike Molokomme); Respondent: Alfred Keetsi; Respondent: Bakanu Molebatsi; Respondent: Nakedi Ramoni; Respondent: Virginia Ramongane; Respondent: Lydia Ramongane; Respondent: Edson Khumalo; Respondent: Miriam Skhosana; Respondent: Moiokomme, Mosoni; Respondent: Unknown Occupiers of Lindley Farm 528 Portion 13; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Local Municipality; Respondent: Department of Land Affairs; Respondent: City of Mogle Local Municipality
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 January 2014
Case Number
LCC143/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Affidavit Filed by Respondents in Response to Rule Nisi
Outcome
Application to strike out the affidavit delivered by the first to forty-fourth respondents in response to the rule nisi is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Loots AJ
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Eviction Proceedings, Rule Nisi, Notice of Bar, Late Filing of Affidavit
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Eviction Proceedings Rule Nisi Notice of Bar Late Filing of Affidavit

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cradle City 528 (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Allan Mabilo

Respondent

Molungisi Zuma

Respondent

Albert Zimba

Respondent

Edward Ratau

Respondent

Ali Sehaswane

Respondent

Sydney Tswi

Respondent

Norman Mashamatie

Respondent

Bongeni Zuma

Respondent

Keletso Molea

Respondent

Godfrey Molatsi

Respondent

Colbert Litepo

Respondent

Maria Njkweni

Respondent

Lovemore Banda

Respondent

Emmanual Mancho

Respondent

Joseph Skhona

Respondent

Gloria Stofile

Respondent

Moses Masila

Respondent

Mavis Dube

Respondent

Manala Mahlangu

Respondent

Wilfred Ramane

Respondent

Zodwa Mosime

Respondent

Vickson Sithole

Respondent

Seun Mthambo

Respondent

Donald Milanzi

Respondent

Vanlotten Mkhwanazi

Respondent

Jim Mdomu

Respondent

Bongo Qwabi

Respondent

Mpule Ramela

Respondent

Jonathan Chibwe

Respondent

Maria Masumboka

Respondent

Sootho Motsoeneng

Respondent

Eric Msane

Respondent

Matome Relela

Respondent

Johannes Malatsi

Respondent

Ramaruro Freddie

Respondent

Motsumi (Mike Molokomme)

Respondent

Alfred Keetsi

Respondent

Bakanu Molebatsi

Respondent

Nakedi Ramoni

Respondent

Virginia Ramongane

Respondent

Lydia Ramongane

Respondent

Edson Khumalo

Respondent

Miriam Skhosana

Respondent

Moiokomme, Mosoni

Respondent

Unknown Occupiers of Lindley Farm 528 Portion 13

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Local Municipality

Respondent

Department of Land Affairs

Respondent

City of Mogle Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Strike Out Affidavit Filed by Respondents in Response to Rule Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the affidavit filed by the occupiers in response to the rule nisi should be struck out due to alleged non-compliance with court rules.
  2. 2 Whether Rule 32(2) of the Land Claims Court Rules applies to affidavits filed in response to a rule nisi.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents were properly notified and represented during the eviction proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the application to strike out the affidavit delivered by the occupiers in response to the rule nisi. The judge found that the affidavit was not an answering affidavit but a response to the rule nisi, which is intended to allow affected parties to show cause why the proposed order should not be made. Rule 32(2) does not apply to such affidavits. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring that occupiers are properly notified and represented, especially in eviction matters under ESTA, and that the applicant's insistence on striking out the affidavit was misplaced. The court further noted that the applicant was warned about the lack of merit in its application but...

Court Disposition

Application to strike out the affidavit delivered by the first to forty-fourth respondents in response to the rule nisi is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to strike out the affidavit delivered by the first to forty-fourth respondents in response to the rule nisi issued by this court on 31 October 2013 is dismissed with costs.