Maphango (Mgidlana) and Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd ([2011] 3 All SA 535 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 100; 611/2010 (1 June 2011)

Maphango (Mgidlana) and Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd ([2011] 3 All SA 535 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 100; 611/2010 (1 June 2011)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent validly terminated the lease agreements in accordance with their express terms and the common law. The court rejected the appellants' contention that a tacit term existed prohibiting the use of the termination clause to circumvent rental escalation provisions, finding no necessity for such a term and noting that motive for termination is generally irrelevant. The court further held that reasonableness and fairness are not independent grounds for refusing to enforce a contractual right, and that public policy, as informed by constitutional values, does not override the express terms of the lease in this context. The termination did not...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 100
Parties
Appellant: Ntombizodwa Yvonne Maphango (now Mgidlana) and 17 Others; Respondent: Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 2011
Case Number
611/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court (johannesburg), First Instance
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Judges
Brand, Lewis, Cachalia, Shongwe, Plasket
Legal Topics
Termination of Lease, Security of Tenure, Public Policy, Section 26 Constitution, Rental Housing Act, Unfair Practice Regulations
Land and Property Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Termination of Lease Security of Tenure Public Policy Section 26 Constitution Rental Housing Act +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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ntombizodwa Yvonne Maphango (now Mgidlana) and 17 Others

Appellant

Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court (johannesburg), First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent validly terminated the lease agreements with the appellants.
  2. 2 Whether a tacit term existed prohibiting the use of the termination clause to circumvent rental escalation provisions.
  3. 3 Whether the termination of the leases was contrary to public policy, including section 26(1) of the Constitution and the Rental Housing Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent validly terminated the lease agreements in accordance with their express terms and the common law. The court rejected the appellants' contention that a tacit term existed prohibiting the use of the termination clause to circumvent rental escalation provisions, finding no necessity for such a term and noting that motive for termination is generally irrelevant. The court further held that reasonableness and fairness are not independent grounds for refusing to enforce a contractual right, and that public policy, as informed by constitutional values, does not override the express terms of the lease in this context. The termination did not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs is made in respect of the appeal.