Dannhauser N.O. and Others v Van Der Walt N.O. and Others (68959/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 1027 (19 December 2014)

Dannhauser N.O. and Others v Van Der Walt N.O. and Others (68959/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 1027 (19 December 2014)

The court found that the applicants' claim to transfer of the properties under the 2005 sale agreement prescribed at the end of 2008, as the obligation became enforceable by 1 January 2006 and no valid interruption of prescription occurred. The 2007 interim interdict lapsed when the related action was not instituted by 30 June 2007, and the subsequent action was withdrawn in 2010. The applicants failed to demonstrate any legal basis for further suspension or interruption of prescription, including arguments based on the mental capacity of Dannhauser or the number of trustees. The court exercised its discretion against granting the interdict, noting the applicants' lack of diligence in...

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 1027
Parties
Applicant: Marijke Dannhauser N.O.; Applicant: Lizel Dannhauser N.O.; Applicant: Johan Wessels N.O.; Applicant: Johannes Christiaan Dannhauser N.O.; Respondent: Cornelia Susanna Van Der Walt N.O.; Respondent: Thomas Richard Dannhauser N.O.; Respondent: Gideon George Van Der Walt N.O.; Respondent: Derick Kuun N.O.; Respondent: Verdere Trustees van die Derick Kuun Familietrust; Respondent: Die Registrateur van Aktes: Pretoria; Respondent: Die Meester van die Hooggeregshof
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 December 2014
Case Number
68959/2014
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination of Urgent Application for Interdict
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of senior counsel.
Judges
A.A. Louw
Legal Topics
Interdict, Prescription Act, Trust Litigation, Transfer of Property
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interdict Prescription Act Trust Litigation Transfer of Property

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marijke Dannhauser N.O.

Applicant

Lizel Dannhauser N.O.

Applicant

Johan Wessels N.O.

Applicant

Johannes Christiaan Dannhauser N.O.

Applicant

Cornelia Susanna Van Der Walt N.O.

Respondent

Thomas Richard Dannhauser N.O.

Respondent

Gideon George Van Der Walt N.O.

Respondent

Derick Kuun N.O.

Respondent

Verdere Trustees van die Derick Kuun Familietrust

Respondent

Die Registrateur van Aktes: Pretoria

Respondent

Die Meester van die Hooggeregshof

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination of Urgent Application for Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an interdict preventing transfer of the farms Rietfontein and Rietbult pending finalisation of the 2008 action.
  2. 2 Whether the right to claim transfer under the 2005 sale agreement has prescribed.
  3. 3 Whether the 2007 interim interdict remains operative.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' claim to transfer of the properties under the 2005 sale agreement prescribed at the end of 2008, as the obligation became enforceable by 1 January 2006 and no valid interruption of prescription occurred. The 2007 interim interdict lapsed when the related action was not instituted by 30 June 2007, and the subsequent action was withdrawn in 2010. The applicants failed to demonstrate any legal basis for further suspension or interruption of prescription, including arguments based on the mental capacity of Dannhauser or the number of trustees. The court exercised its discretion against granting the interdict, noting the applicants' lack of diligence in...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of senior counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The costs include the costs of a senior advocate.