Fourie N.O. and Others v Nel (16614/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 810 (16 October 2014)

Fourie N.O. and Others v Nel (16614/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 810 (16 October 2014)

The court found that the respondent's occupation of the properties was lawful under the terms of the written lease agreement. The previous judgment in case no 49102/2013 had already addressed the substantive issues and indicated that the present application should be read together with that judgment. As a result, the application for eviction could not succeed. The applicants, being unsuccessful, were ordered to pay the costs of the application jointly.

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 810
Parties
Applicant: Josef Markus Fourie N.O.; Respondent: Deon Nel
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 October 2014
Case Number
16614/2014
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs awarded against the applicants.
Judges
W R C Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Eviction, Lease Agreement, Costs Order
Land and Property Eviction Lease Agreement Costs Order

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

Josef Markus Fourie N.O.

Applicant

Deon Nel

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be evicted from the properties forming part of the farm Grootdoorns 172 under a written lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to an eviction order.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's occupation of the properties was lawful under the terms of the written lease agreement. The previous judgment in case no 49102/2013 had already addressed the substantive issues and indicated that the present application should be read together with that judgment. As a result, the application for eviction could not succeed. The applicants, being unsuccessful, were ordered to pay the costs of the application jointly.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs awarded against the applicants.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicants are jointly ordered to pay the costs of the application.