Impress Services v Freddy and Others (39913/2016) [2017] ZAGPJHC 136 (31 May 2017)

Impress Services v Freddy and Others (39913/2016) [2017] ZAGPJHC 136 (31 May 2017)

The court found that the applicant had established exceptional circumstances as required by section 18 of the Superior Courts Act. The respondents had delayed the appeal process and failed to provide evidence that eviction would render them homeless or that they were indigent. The applicant was suffering irreparable harm due to unpaid utility bills and inability to recover damages. The respondents had alternative accommodation and assets, and their claim for municipal-provided housing was unsupported. The balance of prejudice favoured the applicant, and the respondents' bona fides in pursuing the appeal were questionable due to their lack of action. Accordingly, the court granted leave to...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPJHC 136
Parties
Applicant: Impress Services; Respondent: Buso Freddy; Respondent: Radebe Freddy; Respondent: Radebe Nombuso; Respondent: Mzinyathi Mduduzi; Respondent: Xorile Queen; Respondent: Mpange Zithulele; Respondent: Mpange Sibongiseni; Respondent: Nhlapo Maria
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 May 2017
Case Number
39913/2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Implement Eviction Order Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application granted. Leave to implement the eviction order pending appeal is granted.
Judges
E Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Eviction, Leave to Implement Order, Exceptional Circumstances, Irreparable Harm, Superior Courts Act Section 18
Civil Procedure Land and Property Eviction Leave to Implement Order Exceptional Circumstances Irreparable Harm Superior Courts Act Section 18

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Impress Services

Applicant

Buso Freddy

Respondent

Radebe Freddy

Respondent

Radebe Nombuso

Respondent

Mzinyathi Mduduzi

Respondent

Xorile Queen

Respondent

Mpange Zithulele

Respondent

Mpange Sibongiseni

Respondent

Nhlapo Maria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Implement Eviction Order Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established exceptional circumstances justifying the implementation of the eviction order pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will suffer irreparable harm if the eviction order is not implemented.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents will suffer irreparable harm if evicted before the appeal is finalised.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established exceptional circumstances as required by section 18 of the Superior Courts Act. The respondents had delayed the appeal process and failed to provide evidence that eviction would render them homeless or that they were indigent. The applicant was suffering irreparable harm due to unpaid utility bills and inability to recover damages. The respondents had alternative accommodation and assets, and their claim for municipal-provided housing was unsupported. The balance of prejudice favoured the applicant, and the respondents' bona fides in pursuing the appeal were questionable due to their lack of action. Accordingly, the court granted leave to...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Leave to implement the eviction order pending appeal is granted.

Orders

  • The application is heard urgently and the court dispenses with the forms and rules relating to service; non-compliance with the rules is condoned in terms of Rule 6(12).
  • The order issued by Wright J on 6 December 2016 is to be set into motion and the Sheriff is to evict the respondents from the premises known as ERF […], Selection Park, Springs, Gauteng, if the respondents do not voluntarily vacate within 48 hours of this order.