Jordaan NO v Tung'Ande and Others (77334/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 165 (14 February 2017)

Jordaan NO v Tung'Ande and Others (77334/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 165 (14 February 2017)

The applicants failed to provide a reasonable explanation for their default, as they were personally served with all relevant court processes and were advised by their own attorney not to delay the matter further. Their status as heirs to the estate does not, in itself, constitute a bona fide defence or prospects of success in opposing the eviction. The applicants' conduct indicated an attempt to stall the finalisation of the deceased estate for their own benefit. Consequently, the requirements for condonation were not met, and the application was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 165
Parties
Applicant: Jordaan J N.O.; Respondent: Tung'Ande HR; Respondent: Tung'Ande E; Respondent: Tumg'Ande J; Respondent: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 February 2017
Case Number
77334/2014
Procedural Posture
Condonation Application / Application for Condonation and Setting Aside of Default Judgment
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed with costs.
Judges
Hughes
Legal Topics
Condonation, Eviction Proceedings, Unlawful Occupation, Deceased Estate, Default Judgment
Civil Procedure Land and Property Condonation Eviction Proceedings Unlawful Occupation Deceased Estate Default Judgment

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jordaan J N.O.

Applicant

Tung'Ande HR

Respondent

Tung'Ande E

Respondent

Tumg'Ande J

Respondent

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Condonation Application / Application for Condonation and Setting Aside of Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants provided a reasonable explanation for their default in the eviction proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have bona fide prospects of success in opposing the eviction order.
  3. 3 Whether condonation for the late application to set aside the default judgment should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to provide a reasonable explanation for their default, as they were personally served with all relevant court processes and were advised by their own attorney not to delay the matter further. Their status as heirs to the estate does not, in itself, constitute a bona fide defence or prospects of success in opposing the eviction. The applicants' conduct indicated an attempt to stall the finalisation of the deceased estate for their own benefit. Consequently, the requirements for condonation were not met, and the application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation brought by the applicants is dismissed with costs.