Isedor Skog N.O. and Others v Koos Agulus and Others (LCC88/2019) [2021] ZALCC 13 (7 July 2021)

Isedor Skog N.O. and Others v Koos Agulus and Others (LCC88/2019) [2021] ZALCC 13 (7 July 2021)

Although there is no reasonable prospect of success on appeal, there is a compelling reason for the Supreme Court of Appeal to consider the application. The issues of mass eviction without specific attribution of wrongdoing and the costs order against the Department require authoritative determination. The court finds that the applicants have not provided sufficient grounds for mass eviction under ESTA, as the legislation requires specific acts to be attributed to individual occupiers. The right of residence is based on consent, not employment, and termination must follow prescribed procedures. The court also notes that the failure to mention section 10(3) does not mean it was not...

Citation
[2021] ZALCC 13
Parties
Applicant: Isedor Skog N.O.; Applicant: Reinette Skog N.O.; Applicant: Hendrik Collins Gerryts N.O.; Respondent: Koos Agulus and 25 Others; Respondent: Drakenstein Municipality; Respondent: Head: Western Cape Provincial Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 July 2021
Case Number
LCC88/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Dismissal of Eviction Application and Costs Order
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.
Judges
Ncube
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Eviction Procedure, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Eviction Procedure Leave to Appeal Costs Award

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isedor Skog N.O.

Applicant

Reinette Skog N.O.

Applicant

Hendrik Collins Gerryts N.O.

Applicant

Koos Agulus and 25 Others

Respondent

Drakenstein Municipality

Respondent

Head: Western Cape Provincial Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Dismissal of Eviction Application and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the dismissal of the eviction application.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted regarding the refusal to order costs against the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.
  3. 3 Whether mass eviction is permissible under ESTA without attributing specific acts of wrongdoing to individual occupiers.

Ratio Decidendi

Although there is no reasonable prospect of success on appeal, there is a compelling reason for the Supreme Court of Appeal to consider the application. The issues of mass eviction without specific attribution of wrongdoing and the costs order against the Department require authoritative determination. The court finds that the applicants have not provided sufficient grounds for mass eviction under ESTA, as the legislation requires specific acts to be attributed to individual occupiers. The right of residence is based on consent, not employment, and termination must follow prescribed procedures. The court also notes that the failure to mention section 10(3) does not mean it was not...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.
  • Costs will be costs on appeal.