De Luca and Others v Brazilie Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023-130579) [2024] ZAGPJHC 18 (4 January 2024)

De Luca and Others v Brazilie Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023-130579) [2024] ZAGPJHC 18 (4 January 2024)

The applicants failed to establish a prima facie right to an interim interdict. The Trust deed does not confer a right of exclusive use or enjoyment of the entire farm to the beneficiaries. The lease agreement with Mondzo Camps & Conservation (Pty) Ltd is minimally invasive, covering less than 1% of the property, and is consistent with the Trust's objectives of nature conservation and benefit to descendants. The trustees are empowered to enter into leases, and the lease supports the farm's upkeep and conservation obligations. The court has jurisdiction as the relief sought is pending a trial within its jurisdiction. The application is dismissed as the applicants have not shown their...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 18
Parties
Applicant: Louise Ann De Luca; Applicant: Peter John De Luca; Applicant: Linda Margaret De Luca; Respondent: Brazilie Farms (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Paul Aldo De Luca N.O.; Respondent: Andrew Aldo De Luca N.O.; Respondent: Linda Margaret De Luca N.O.; Respondent: Paul Aldo De Luca; Respondent: Andrew Aldo De Luca; Respondent: Mondzo Camps & Conservation (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 January 2024
Case Number
2023-130579
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict Pending Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded to the second and third respondents on a party and party basis, limited to the costs of one counsel.
Judges
N Manoim
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Trust Beneficiary Rights, Nature Conservation, Lease Agreement, Piercing Corporate Veil
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interim Interdict Trust Beneficiary Rights Nature Conservation Lease Agreement Piercing Corporate Veil

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louise Ann De Luca

Applicant

Peter John De Luca

Applicant

Linda Margaret De Luca

Applicant

Brazilie Farms (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Paul Aldo De Luca N.O.

Respondent

Andrew Aldo De Luca N.O.

Respondent

Linda Margaret De Luca N.O.

Respondent

Paul Aldo De Luca

Respondent

Andrew Aldo De Luca

Respondent

Mondzo Camps & Conservation (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie right to an interim interdict preventing occupation of the farm by the seventh respondent pending the outcome of the August trial.
  2. 2 Whether the lease agreement entered into by the trustees/directors violates the applicants' rights as beneficiaries of the Trust.
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant the relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish a prima facie right to an interim interdict. The Trust deed does not confer a right of exclusive use or enjoyment of the entire farm to the beneficiaries. The lease agreement with Mondzo Camps & Conservation (Pty) Ltd is minimally invasive, covering less than 1% of the property, and is consistent with the Trust's objectives of nature conservation and benefit to descendants. The trustees are empowered to enter into leases, and the lease supports the farm's upkeep and conservation obligations. The court has jurisdiction as the relief sought is pending a trial within its jurisdiction. The application is dismissed as the applicants have not shown their...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded to the second and third respondents on a party and party basis, limited to the costs of one counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The second and third respondents are entitled to their costs on a party and party basis, confined to the costs of one counsel.