Madison Financing (Pty) Ltd Bernice Croeser and Another v Swanepoel NO and Others (20957/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 515 (28 October 2010)

Madison Financing (Pty) Ltd Bernice Croeser and Another v Swanepoel NO and Others (20957/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 515 (28 October 2010)

The court found that the sale agreement between the first respondent and the second applicant was valid, binding, and approved by the Master. The respondents' attempts to cancel the agreement and sell the property to a third party were not supported by any lawful basis. The delay in transfer was not attributable to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] ZAWCHC 515
Parties
Applicant: Madison Financing (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Bernice Croeser (formerly Andrews); Respondent: Eva Marie Swanepoel N.O.; Respondent: Paulus Bernhardus Koch; Respondent: JozepHSIncorporated; Respondent: Christine Adams; Respondent: Clara Solomons; Respondent: Hennie Jonkers; Respondent: Salie Solomons; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds, Cape Town
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 October 2010
Case Number
20957/2010
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interdict and Ancillary Relief
Outcome
Application granted. Interdict and ancillary orders issued in favour of the applicants.
Judges
Steyn
Legal Topics
Interdict, Transfer of Immovable Property, Administration of Deceased Estates, Breach of Contract
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interdict Transfer of Immovable Property Administration of Deceased Estates Breach of Contract

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

Parties

Madison Financing (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Bernice Croeser (formerly Andrews)

Applicant

Eva Marie Swanepoel N.O.

Respondent

Paulus Bernhardus Koch

Respondent

JozepHSIncorporated

Respondent

Christine Adams

Respondent

Clara Solomons

Respondent

Hennie Jonkers

Respondent

Salie Solomons

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds, Cape Town

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interdict and Ancillary Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents may lawfully dispose of or transfer the property pending registration of transfer to the second applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the first respondent, as Master's representative, acted lawfully in cancelling the mandate to the transferring attorney and appointing a substitute.
  3. 3 Whether the sale agreement between first respondent and second applicant remains valid and enforceable.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the sale agreement between the first respondent and the second applicant was valid, binding, and approved by the Master. The respondents' attempts to cancel the agreement and sell the property to a third party were not supported by any lawful basis. The delay in transfer was not attributable to the applicants, and the respondents' conduct was found to be reprehensible and unprofessional. The first respondent's purported substitution of the transferring attorney was not legally competent under section 52 of the Administration of Estates Act. The applicants were entitled to an interdict restraining the respondents from disposing of or transferring the property pending...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Interdict and ancillary orders issued in favour of the applicants.

Orders

  • Non-compliance with the rules and practice of the Court is condoned.
  • Pending final registration of transfer of Erf 6550, Westfleur, first, second, and third respondents are interdicted and restrained from disposing of, transferring, or alienating the property to any third party.