Guy & Guy Investments Projects CC v Tau Pahlane Incorporated Attorneys (49638/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 922 (21 October 2016)

Guy & Guy Investments Projects CC v Tau Pahlane Incorporated Attorneys (49638/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 922 (21 October 2016)

The respondent failed to raise any valid defence to the applicant's claim. The purported defences are frivolous and amount to a mere attempt to delay payment. Clause 12.2 of the lease agreement clearly obliges the respondent to pay rental and charges for the period of continued occupation after termination. The respondent acknowledged the termination and its intention to remain until March 2016, thereby incurring liability for the claimed amounts. The court is satisfied that the applicant has established its entitlement to summary judgment, including interest at the prescribed legal rate.

Citation
[2016] ZAGPPHC 922
Parties
Applicant: Guy & Guy Investments Projects CC; Respondent: Tau Pahlane Incorporated Attorneys
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 October 2016
Case Number
49638/2016
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of the applicant.
Judges
E.L. Swartz
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Lease Agreement, Unlawful Occupation, Liquidated Claim, Attorney Own Client Costs
Civil Procedure Land and Property Summary Judgment Lease Agreement Unlawful Occupation Liquidated Claim Attorney Own Client Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guy & Guy Investments Projects CC

Applicant

Tau Pahlane Incorporated Attorneys

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Opposed Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has a bona fide defence to the applicant's claim for rental and charges after termination of the lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to summary judgment for the claimed amount and interest.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's occupation after termination obliges payment of rental and charges.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to raise any valid defence to the applicant's claim. The purported defences are frivolous and amount to a mere attempt to delay payment. Clause 12.2 of the lease agreement clearly obliges the respondent to pay rental and charges for the period of continued occupation after termination. The respondent acknowledged the termination and its intention to remain until March 2016, thereby incurring liability for the claimed amounts. The court is satisfied that the applicant has established its entitlement to summary judgment, including interest at the prescribed legal rate.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the amount of R197 773.11.
  • Interest on the amount of R197 773.11 at the rate of 9% per annum, a temporae morae.