Government Employees Pension Fund v Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t/a Sekgala Group (14908/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1100 (4 September 2017)

Government Employees Pension Fund v Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t/a Sekgala Group (14908/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1100 (4 September 2017)

The applicant is the registered owner of the premises and terminated the lease agreement, giving proper notice to vacate. The respondent failed to vacate and remains in unlawful occupation. The respondent's points in limine regarding authority, agency agreement, and locus standi are dismissed as the applicant's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 1100
Parties
Applicant: Government Employees Pension Fund; Respondent: Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t/a Sekgala Group
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 September 2017
Case Number
14908/16
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted. Eviction order issued against respondent and all persons occupying through or under respondent. Costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
Tlhapi VV
Legal Topics
Eviction, Unlawful Occupation, Locus Standi, Rule 18 Compliance, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Unlawful Occupation Locus Standi Rule 18 Compliance Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Government Employees Pension Fund

Applicant

Rambose Property (Pty) Ltd t/a Sekgala Group

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to evict the respondent and all persons occupying the property through or under the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is in unlawful occupation of the premises.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has locus standi and authority to launch the eviction proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is the registered owner of the premises and terminated the lease agreement, giving proper notice to vacate. The respondent failed to vacate and remains in unlawful occupation. The respondent's points in limine regarding authority, agency agreement, and locus standi are dismissed as the applicant's ownership and authorization are uncontested. The respondent's claim that 'Manose' is the lawful occupant is unsupported by evidence and does not create a genuine dispute of fact. The application is properly before the High Court, and PIE does not apply to juristic persons. The respondent and all persons occupying through or under it are ordered to vacate the property. Costs are...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Eviction order issued against respondent and all persons occupying through or under respondent. Costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent and all persons in possession of and/or occupying the immovable property situated at Unit B6-B7A, Greenoaks Office Park, Cnr Bekker and Gregory Avenue, Vorna Valley, Midrand through or under the respondent are ordered to vacate the property within 10 days of service of this order.
  • The Sheriff is authorized and directed to evict the respondent and/or any person holding the property by, through or under the respondent should they fail to vacate within the period mentioned, after giving 3 days notice to vacate.