Maseko and Another v Khepeng and Another (4751/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 13 (30 January 2024)

Maseko and Another v Khepeng and Another (4751/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 13 (30 January 2024)

The court found that the respondents were in undisturbed possession of the property on 15 July 2022, supported by credible evidence including lease agreements and affidavits from Lorraine and Precious Mahamotsa, who demonstrated lawful authority over the property. The applicants' actions in locking the premises and removing equipment constituted spoliation. The application for leave to appeal did not meet the statutory threshold of reasonable prospects of success under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, as the evidence did not support the applicants' contention that the respondents lacked possession. The court concluded that there was no sound, rational basis to believe another...

Citation
[2024] ZAFSHC 13
Parties
Applicant: Bonga Paul Maseko; Applicant: Jappy Jacobs Masangani; Respondent: Teboho Clement Khepeng; Respondent: Khepeng Trading (PTY) LTD
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 January 2024
Case Number
4751/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following an Order Granting Spoliation Relief
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Berry AJ
Legal Topics
Spoliation, Undisturbed Possession, Leave to Appeal, Lease Agreement, Ownership Dispute
Civil Procedure Land and Property Spoliation Undisturbed Possession Leave to Appeal Lease Agreement Ownership Dispute

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bonga Paul Maseko

Applicant

Jappy Jacobs Masangani

Applicant

Teboho Clement Khepeng

Respondent

Khepeng Trading (PTY) LTD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following an Order Granting Spoliation Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents were in undisturbed possession of the property on 15 July 2022.
  2. 2 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the threshold of reasonable prospects of success under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents were in undisturbed possession of the property on 15 July 2022, supported by credible evidence including lease agreements and affidavits from Lorraine and Precious Mahamotsa, who demonstrated lawful authority over the property. The applicants' actions in locking the premises and removing equipment constituted spoliation. The application for leave to appeal did not meet the statutory threshold of reasonable prospects of success under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, as the evidence did not support the applicants' contention that the respondents lacked possession. The court concluded that there was no sound, rational basis to believe another...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.