Lau v Real Tine Investments 165 CC (50134/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 313 (23 July 2019)

Lau v Real Tine Investments 165 CC (50134/2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 313 (23 July 2019)

The applicant was in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the premises and was unlawfully deprived of possession when the respondent disconnected the electricity and changed the locks without her consent or a court order. Both actions constituted acts of spoliation. The respondent's argument that the relief sought was for enforcement of lease rights was rejected; the application was for restoration of possession. The urgency was justified as the applicant only became aware of the full dispossession on 20 June 2019 and attempted to resolve the matter before approaching the court. The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to grant the relief sought. The applicant is entitled to restoration...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 313
Parties
Applicant: Yuen Fan Lau; Respondent: Real Time Investments 165 CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 July 2019
Case Number
50134/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Mandament Van Spolie
Outcome
Application granted; possession and electricity supply to be restored; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
Millar
Legal Topics
Mandament Van Spolie, Unlawful Dispossession, Urgent Interdict, Possession of Premises, Restoration of Electricity
Civil Procedure Land and Property Mandament Van Spolie Unlawful Dispossession Urgent Interdict Possession of Premises Restoration of Electricity

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yuen Fan Lau

Applicant

Real Time Investments 165 CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Mandament Van Spolie

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was unlawfully deprived of possession of the leased premises.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent committed acts of spoliation by disconnecting electricity and changing locks.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to urgent restoration of possession and electricity supply.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was in peaceful and undisturbed possession of the premises and was unlawfully deprived of possession when the respondent disconnected the electricity and changed the locks without her consent or a court order. Both actions constituted acts of spoliation. The respondent's argument that the relief sought was for enforcement of lease rights was rejected; the application was for restoration of possession. The urgency was justified as the applicant only became aware of the full dispossession on 20 June 2019 and attempted to resolve the matter before approaching the court. The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to grant the relief sought. The applicant is entitled to restoration...

Court Disposition

Application granted; possession and electricity supply to be restored; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The applicant's possession of the Internet Cafe at Constantia Park Ridge Shopping Centre, 546 Douglas Scholtz Street, Constantia Park, is to be restored.
  • The respondent and/or its directors or employees are ordered to forthwith remove all chains or locks preventing access to the Internet Cafe by the applicant.