Eikenbosch Farm (Pty) Ltd v Matthews (LCC27R/03) [2003] ZALCC 12; 2003 (4) SA 283 (LCC) (12 May 2003)

Eikenbosch Farm (Pty) Ltd v Matthews (LCC27R/03) [2003] ZALCC 12; 2003 (4) SA 283 (LCC) (12 May 2003)

The Land Claims Court found that the magistrate's order for eviction was procedurally flawed due to the absence of written notice of termination as required by the Extension of Security of Tenure Act. Furthermore, the court held that new facts and affidavits submitted after the magistrate's judgment could not be considered in review proceedings unless all parties were given notice and an opportunity to respond. The court set aside the eviction order and remitted the matter to the magistrate to hear the additional evidence, with instructions that any new eviction order must be submitted for automatic review. No order was made as to costs.

Citation
[2003] ZALCC 12
Parties
Applicant: Eikenbosch Farm (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Matthews, P
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 May 2003
Case Number
LCC27R/03
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Automatic Review Under Section 19(3) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act
Outcome
Eviction order set aside; matter remitted to magistrate for hearing of additional evidence; no order as to costs.
Judges
J Moloto
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Eviction Procedure, Automatic Review, Notice of Termination
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Eviction Procedure Automatic Review Notice of Termination

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eikenbosch Farm (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Matthews, P

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Automatic Review Under Section 19(3) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the eviction order was valid in the absence of written notice of termination of residence as required by the Act.
  2. 2 Whether new facts submitted after the magistrate's judgment may be considered in review proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether parties should be given notice and opportunity to respond to new evidence submitted post-judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Land Claims Court found that the magistrate's order for eviction was procedurally flawed due to the absence of written notice of termination as required by the Extension of Security of Tenure Act. Furthermore, the court held that new facts and affidavits submitted after the magistrate's judgment could not be considered in review proceedings unless all parties were given notice and an opportunity to respond. The court set aside the eviction order and remitted the matter to the magistrate to hear the additional evidence, with instructions that any new eviction order must be submitted for automatic review. No order was made as to costs.

Court Disposition

Eviction order set aside; matter remitted to magistrate for hearing of additional evidence; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The order of the Magistrate, Worcester, made on 28 February 2003 is set aside in whole.
  • The matter is remitted to the Magistrate to hear the additional evidence received.