Lochner v Heuwelkor Sewentien (Pty) Ltd and Others (16278/06) [2007] ZAGPHC 110 (20 June 2007)

Lochner v Heuwelkor Sewentien (Pty) Ltd and Others (16278/06) [2007] ZAGPHC 110 (20 June 2007)

The court found that clause 29 and table H of the Randburg Town Planning Scheme do not apply to the shopping centre, as it was erected before the Scheme came into operation and has not undergone substantial external alterations. Internal adjustments do not trigger the parking requirements. The applicant's lease does...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] ZAGPHC 110
Parties
Applicant: RD Lochner; Respondent: Heuwelkor Sewentien (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: AB Pretorius; Respondent: John Ruddy, t/a Je-Nad Motors; Respondent: M Robinson, t/a Cyber Bike; Respondent: N Hoffmann, t/a The Lemon Tree; Respondent: City of Johannesburg
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 June 2007
Case Number
16278/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Murphy
Legal Topics
Town Planning Scheme, Parking Entitlement, Lease Interpretation, Structural Alteration, Servitude Right of Way
Land and Property Civil Procedure Town Planning Scheme Parking Entitlement Lease Interpretation Structural Alteration Servitude Right of Way

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RD Lochner

Applicant

Heuwelkor Sewentien (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

AB Pretorius

Respondent

John Ruddy, t/a Je-Nad Motors

Respondent

M Robinson, t/a Cyber Bike

Respondent

N Hoffmann, t/a The Lemon Tree

Respondent

City of Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Randburg Town Planning Scheme of 1976, specifically clause 29 and table H, applies to the shopping centre in question.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is contractually entitled to additional parking bays under the lease agreement.
  3. 3 Whether internal alterations to the premises trigger the parking requirements under the Town Planning Scheme.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that clause 29 and table H of the Randburg Town Planning Scheme do not apply to the shopping centre, as it was erected before the Scheme came into operation and has not undergone substantial external alterations. Internal adjustments do not trigger the parking requirements. The applicant's lease does not confer any specific entitlement to additional parking beyond two courtesy bays, and there is no legal basis in either the Scheme or the lease for the relief sought. The applicant's interpretation would lead to unreasonable and unjust results, requiring landowners to incur substantial costs for minor internal changes. The application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.