Frater NO and Others v Drakenstein Municipality and Another (6214/2010, 19763/2010) [2011] ZAWCHC 149 (17 February 2011)
The court found that the order made against the Trust was prohibitory, not mandatory, and that the Trust had unlawfully permitted the operation of a restaurant on its premises without the requisite statutory approvals. The lease concluded with Windfall 32 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd was invalid, as the Trust could not pass lawful rights it did not possess. Recognition of such a lease would sanction the very conduct the legislature intended to prevent. The Trust's argument that it could not comply with the order due to the lease was rejected, as the lease itself was a nullity. The court held that non-compliance with the order could be enforced through contempt proceedings. There were no...
- Citation
- [2011] ZAWCHC 149
- Parties
- Applicant: Gerard Frater N.O.; Applicant: Yvette Frater N.O.; Applicant: Jacobus Petrus Rossouw N.O.; Applicant: The Gerard Frater Family Trust; Respondent: Drakenstein Municipality; Respondent: Diana Liebenberg
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 17 February 2011
- Case Number
- 6214/2010 & 19763/2010
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Order of 9 December 2010
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
- Judges
- Cloete
- Legal Topics
- Unlawful Land Use, Building Regulations, Prohibitory Interdict, Validity of Contract, Contempt of Court
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gerard Frater N.O.
Applicant
Yvette Frater N.O.
Applicant
Jacobus Petrus Rossouw N.O.
Applicant
The Gerard Frater Family Trust
Applicant
Drakenstein Municipality
Respondent
Diana Liebenberg
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Order of 9 December 2010
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether paragraph 2 of the order is unenforceable against the Trust.
- 2 Whether the costs order against the Trust was appropriate.
- 3 Whether the lease concluded by the Trust was valid under statutory prohibitions.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the order made against the Trust was prohibitory, not mandatory, and that the Trust had unlawfully permitted the operation of a restaurant on its premises without the requisite statutory approvals. The lease concluded with Windfall 32 Restaurant (Pty) Ltd was invalid, as the Trust could not pass lawful rights it did not possess. Recognition of such a lease would sanction the very conduct the legislature intended to prevent. The Trust's argument that it could not comply with the order due to the lease was rejected, as the lease itself was a nullity. The court held that non-compliance with the order could be enforced through contempt proceedings. There were no...
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Orders
- The Trust's application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- The Trust is ordered to pay the costs of the application, including the costs of two counsel.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment