Instand Trade 110 CC v Lewis and Others (AR 247/13) [2013] ZAKZPHC 58 (25 October 2013)

Instand Trade 110 CC v Lewis and Others (AR 247/13) [2013] ZAKZPHC 58 (25 October 2013)

The court found that the First Respondent was bound by the lease, assignment, and addendum as undisclosed principal, based on uncontested sworn evidence and her acceptance of rental payments. The addendum revived the right of first refusal from the original lease, and the Appellant, while in occupation, was entitled to exercise that right. The court held that the Appellant had established a prima facie right to interim interdictory relief, as the factual allegations regarding agency and the right of first refusal were not disputed. The previous judgment discharging the rule nisi was set aside, and the interim interdict was confirmed pending the outcome of the action.

Citation
[2013] ZAKZPHC 58
Parties
Appellant: Instand Trade 110 CC; Respondent: Eileen Lewis; Respondent: Emil Alexander Lewis; Respondent: Westport Properties (Pty) Limited
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 October 2013
Case Number
AR 247/13
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Discharge of Rule Nisi and Refusal of Interim Interdict
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of court a quo set aside and substituted with confirmation of interim interdict.
Judges
Koen, Vahed, Nkosi
Legal Topics
Right of First Refusal, Undisclosed Principal, Interim Interdict, Lease Renewal, Agency, Alienation of Land Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Right of First Refusal Undisclosed Principal Interim Interdict Lease Renewal Agency Alienation of Land Act

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

Parties

Instand Trade 110 CC

Appellant

Eileen Lewis

Respondent

Emil Alexander Lewis

Respondent

Westport Properties (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Discharge of Rule Nisi and Refusal of Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent is bound by the right of first refusal in the lease agreement as undisclosed principal.
  2. 2 Whether the addendum to the lease revived the right of first refusal after the original lease expired.
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant established a prima facie right to interim interdictory relief pending action.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the First Respondent was bound by the lease, assignment, and addendum as undisclosed principal, based on uncontested sworn evidence and her acceptance of rental payments. The addendum revived the right of first refusal from the original lease, and the Appellant, while in occupation, was entitled to exercise that right. The court held that the Appellant had established a prima facie right to interim interdictory relief, as the factual allegations regarding agency and the right of first refusal were not disputed. The previous judgment discharging the rule nisi was set aside, and the interim interdict was confirmed pending the outcome of the action.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of court a quo set aside and substituted with confirmation of interim interdict.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs, including costs for two counsel.
  • Paragraphs 1(b) and (c) of the rule nisi issued on 7 September 2012 are confirmed.