Maclachlan and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2020/28164) [2022] ZAGPJHC 243 (22 April 2022)

Maclachlan and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2020/28164) [2022] ZAGPJHC 243 (22 April 2022)

The court found that the respondent failed to issue clearance figures within the prescribed period and did not respond to follow-up communications, justifying the applicants' application. The respondent's version regarding prior communication of clearance figures was vague, unsupported by evidence, and contradicted by the applicants' detailed reply. The respondent's conduct after the substantive relief became moot unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and caused the applicants undue expense. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to pay 100% of the applicants' costs on a party-and-party scale up to 21 December 2020, and 80% of the costs on the attorney-and-client scale from 22 December...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 243
Parties
Applicant: G J Maclachlan; Applicant: B R Maclachlan; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Geoff Makhubo; Respondent: Ndivhoniswani Lukhwareni
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 April 2022
Case Number
2020/28164
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Costs Determination After Substantive Relief Became Moot
Outcome
Application for substantive relief became moot; costs awarded against the first respondent as specified.
Judges
VM Movshovich
Legal Topics
Costs Award, Rates Clearance Certificate, Municipal Systems Act, Punitive Costs, Attorney and Client Scale
Civil Procedure Land and Property Costs Award Rates Clearance Certificate Municipal Systems Act Punitive Costs Attorney and Client Scale

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G J Maclachlan

Applicant

B R Maclachlan

Applicant

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Geoff Makhubo

Respondent

Ndivhoniswani Lukhwareni

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Costs Determination After Substantive Relief Became Moot

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed to issue clearance figures within the prescribed period.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were justified in launching the application.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the respondent warranted a punitive costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to issue clearance figures within the prescribed period and did not respond to follow-up communications, justifying the applicants' application. The respondent's version regarding prior communication of clearance figures was vague, unsupported by evidence, and contradicted by the applicants' detailed reply. The respondent's conduct after the substantive relief became moot unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and caused the applicants undue expense. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to pay 100% of the applicants' costs on a party-and-party scale up to 21 December 2020, and 80% of the costs on the attorney-and-client scale from 22 December...

Court Disposition

Application for substantive relief became moot; costs awarded against the first respondent as specified.

Orders

  • The first respondent is declared liable for 100% of the applicants' costs on a party-and-party scale up to and including 21 December 2020.
  • The first respondent is declared liable for 80% of the applicants' costs on the attorney-and-client scale from 22 December 2020 onwards.