Mangwane and Another v Gomba and Others (37830/16) [2019] ZAGPPHC 472 (20 August 2019)

Mangwane and Another v Gomba and Others (37830/16) [2019] ZAGPPHC 472 (20 August 2019)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish locus standi, as they did not provide sufficient proof that the property was ever allocated to them beyond an application for housing. The document relied upon evidenced only a request, not an award of rights or title. The Deeds Registry printout did not show that the property was purchased from the applicants. Furthermore, neither party held a permit, certificate, or trading permit as required by the Conversion Act, and there was no evidence of a proper investigation or inquiry as mandated by the Act. The administrative act of registration was not reviewable under PAJA, as it was not preceded by the required inquiry. Section 6 of...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 472
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Mavabaza Mangwane; Applicant: Margareth Tintswalo Mangwane; Respondent: Jane Gomba; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria; Respondent: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Director General in the Office of the Premier of Gauteng; Respondent: Head of Department of Human Settlement
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 August 2019
Case Number
37830/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs for lack of locus standi.
Judges
N N Bam
Legal Topics
Conversion of Rights Into Leasehold or Ownership Act, Deeds Registry Act, Locus Standi, Exhaustion of Internal Remedies, Administrative Action Review, Title Deed Cancellation
Land and Property Administrative Law Civil Procedure Conversion of Rights Into Leasehold or Ownership Act Deeds Registry Act Locus Standi Exhaustion of Internal Remedies Administrative Action Review +1 more

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

Parties

Joseph Mavabaza Mangwane

Applicant

Margareth Tintswalo Mangwane

Applicant

Jane Gomba

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria

Respondent

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Director General in the Office of the Premier of Gauteng

Respondent

Head of Department of Human Settlement

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have locus standi to seek cancellation of the title deed registered in the first respondent's name.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants exhausted internal remedies before approaching the court.
  3. 3 Whether the correct legal remedy and forum were pursued by the applicants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish locus standi, as they did not provide sufficient proof that the property was ever allocated to them beyond an application for housing. The document relied upon evidenced only a request, not an award of rights or title. The Deeds Registry printout did not show that the property was purchased from the applicants. Furthermore, neither party held a permit, certificate, or trading permit as required by the Conversion Act, and there was no evidence of a proper investigation or inquiry as mandated by the Act. The administrative act of registration was not reviewable under PAJA, as it was not preceded by the required inquiry. Section 6 of...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs for lack of locus standi.

Orders

  • Applicants have no locus standi to bring this application.
  • The application is dismissed with costs.