Khumalo and Others v ERF 507 Charles Street (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC 232/2009) [2009] ZALCC 14 (8 November 2009)
The court found that the applicants had not presented any recognized grounds for rescission or further stay of the eviction order. They had previously been afforded opportunities to petition the Supreme Court of Appeal but had not done so. The repeated applications appeared to be attempts to delay execution rather than genuine pursuit of legal remedies. Section 14 of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act did not assist the applicants, as their claim had already been adjudicated and no special circumstances were shown. The court exercised its discretion not to award costs, considering the public interest nature of the litigation and the applicants' indigence, but warned that further...
- Citation
- [2009] ZALCC 14
- Parties
- Applicant: Mzikayifani Khumalo; Applicant: Mfanseneni Jameson Nzima; Applicant: Mbhekiseni Khumalo; Respondent: ERF 507 Charles Street (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: The Sheriff for the District Paulpietersburg; Respondent: The Director General for the Department of Land Affairs
- Court
- Land Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 8 November 2009
- Case Number
- LCC232/2009
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Interim Relief and Stay of Eviction Warrant
- Outcome
- Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- MIA, G Malindi
- Legal Topics
- Labour Tenant Eviction, Interim Interdict, Condonation, Rescission of Judgment, Public Interest Litigation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mzikayifani Khumalo
Applicant
Mfanseneni Jameson Nzima
Applicant
Mbhekiseni Khumalo
Applicant
ERF 507 Charles Street (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
The Sheriff for the District Paulpietersburg
Respondent
The Director General for the Department of Land Affairs
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Interim Relief and Stay of Eviction Warrant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to urgent interim relief staying the execution of the eviction warrant pending determination of their land claim.
- 2 Whether the applicants have established grounds for condonation for non-compliance with court rules.
- 3 Whether the applicants have presented recognized grounds for rescission or further stay of eviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had not presented any recognized grounds for rescission or further stay of the eviction order. They had previously been afforded opportunities to petition the Supreme Court of Appeal but had not done so. The repeated applications appeared to be attempts to delay execution rather than genuine pursuit of legal remedies. Section 14 of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act did not assist the applicants, as their claim had already been adjudicated and no special circumstances were shown. The court exercised its discretion not to award costs, considering the public interest nature of the litigation and the applicants' indigence, but warned that further...
Court Disposition
Application dismissed; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The urgent application lodged on 27 November 2009 under case number LCC232/2009 is dismissed in its entirety.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment