Edani and Another v Pioen 1153 (Pty) Ltd and Another (3016/2018) [2019] ZAMPMHC 3 (5 April 2019)

Edani and Another v Pioen 1153 (Pty) Ltd and Another (3016/2018) [2019] ZAMPMHC 3 (5 April 2019)

The court found that the applicants failed to fulfil the suspensive condition in the sale agreements, as they did not obtain finance within the prescribed period. The respondent's acceptance and immediate refund of the late payment did not constitute a tacit extension or waiver of the condition. The terms of the agreements were clear, and the delay in completion of the property units was expressly anticipated by clause 6.1. The applicants did not make out a case for waiver in their founding papers, and no extension for fulfilment of the condition was granted. The grounds of appeal were without merit, and the application for leave to appeal had no reasonable prospect of success under...

Citation
[2019] ZAMPMHC 3
Parties
Applicant: Christiaan Chidozie Edani; Applicant: Chinyere Victoria Edani; Respondent: Pioen 1153 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds
Court
Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 April 2019
Case Number
3016/2018
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Interim Interdict Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
JH Roelofse
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Suspensive Condition, Sale of Immovable Property, Waiver of Contractual Rights
Civil Procedure Land and Property Interim Interdict Suspensive Condition Sale of Immovable Property Waiver of Contractual Rights

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christiaan Chidozie Edani

Applicant

Chinyere Victoria Edani

Applicant

Pioen 1153 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Interim Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants fulfilled the suspensive condition in the sale agreements.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent tacitly extended the time period for fulfilment of the suspensive condition by accepting late payment.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants made out a case for waiver of the suspensive condition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to fulfil the suspensive condition in the sale agreements, as they did not obtain finance within the prescribed period. The respondent's acceptance and immediate refund of the late payment did not constitute a tacit extension or waiver of the condition. The terms of the agreements were clear, and the delay in completion of the property units was expressly anticipated by clause 6.1. The applicants did not make out a case for waiver in their founding papers, and no extension for fulfilment of the condition was granted. The grounds of appeal were without merit, and the application for leave to appeal had no reasonable prospect of success under...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.