Hardware and Others v Sizane Agencies (Pty) Ltd and Another (61478/09) [2010] ZAGPPHC 610 (20 May 2010)

Hardware and Others v Sizane Agencies (Pty) Ltd and Another (61478/09) [2010] ZAGPPHC 610 (20 May 2010)

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a truthful and bona fide explanation for their delay in bringing the rescission application. Documentary evidence showed that the applicants were informed of the judgment on 30 April 2009, contradicting their claim of only becoming aware on 2 September 2009. The applicants did not dispute the respondents' allegations regarding service and withdrawal of their attorney at the hearing. Applying the principles of condonation, the court held that the applicants had not shown good cause and that their prospects of success were minimal. Accordingly, the application for rescission and condonation was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2010] ZAGPPHC 610
Parties
Applicant: K K Hardware; Applicant: H C Ndou; Applicant: J B Spares; Respondent: Sizane Agencies (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: City of Tshwane
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 May 2010
Case Number
61478/09
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Ismail
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Condonation, Eviction, Service of Process
Civil Procedure Land and Property Rescission of Judgment Condonation Eviction Service of Process

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K K Hardware

Applicant

H C Ndou

Applicant

J B Spares

Applicant

Sizane Agencies (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

City of Tshwane

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown good cause for rescission of the default judgment granted on 23 March 2009.
  2. 2 Whether condonation for the late filing of the rescission application should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were properly served with the eviction application and court order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to provide a truthful and bona fide explanation for their delay in bringing the rescission application. Documentary evidence showed that the applicants were informed of the judgment on 30 April 2009, contradicting their claim of only becoming aware on 2 September 2009. The applicants did not dispute the respondents' allegations regarding service and withdrawal of their attorney at the hearing. Applying the principles of condonation, the court held that the applicants had not shown good cause and that their prospects of success were minimal. Accordingly, the application for rescission and condonation was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for rescission and condonation is dismissed with costs.