Matthews N.O v Kruger and Others (61818/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 581 (18 July 2023)

Matthews N.O v Kruger and Others (61818/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 581 (18 July 2023)

The applicant, as executrix, established locus standi to seek eviction based on registered title and absence of expropriation. The respondents failed to provide evidence that the premises were expropriated or that the applicant lacked title. The alleged disputes of fact were not bona fide or material and did not warrant referral to oral evidence. The defence of lis alibi pendens was not substantiated, as the pending action did not concern the same relief or cause. The respondents admitted the lease agreement had terminated and did not assert entitlement to remain in occupation. The counter-application for declaratory relief failed due to lack of evidence of fraudulent misrepresentation...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 581
Parties
Applicant: Yasmien Matthews N.O.; Respondent: Louis Frances Kruger; Respondent: Human Rautenbach Kruger; Respondent: The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 July 2023
Case Number
61818/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment on Merits and Counter Application
Outcome
Application granted; respondents ordered to vacate premises; counter-application dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
G Nel
Legal Topics
Eviction, Locus Standi, Lis Alibi Pendens, Lease Agreement, Summary Judgment
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Locus Standi Lis Alibi Pendens Lease Agreement Summary Judgment

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yasmien Matthews N.O.

Applicant

Louis Frances Kruger

Respondent

Human Rautenbach Kruger

Respondent

The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment on Merits and Counter Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant, as executrix, has locus standi to seek eviction of the respondents from the leased premises.
  2. 2 Whether genuine disputes of fact exist requiring referral to oral evidence or trial.
  3. 3 Whether the defence of lis alibi pendens applies due to pending action between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant, as executrix, established locus standi to seek eviction based on registered title and absence of expropriation. The respondents failed to provide evidence that the premises were expropriated or that the applicant lacked title. The alleged disputes of fact were not bona fide or material and did not warrant referral to oral evidence. The defence of lis alibi pendens was not substantiated, as the pending action did not concern the same relief or cause. The respondents admitted the lease agreement had terminated and did not assert entitlement to remain in occupation. The counter-application for declaratory relief failed due to lack of evidence of fraudulent misrepresentation...

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondents ordered to vacate premises; counter-application dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The First and Second Respondent, and any other persons or entities occupying the premises described as Plot […], 5[...] D[...] D[...] Avenue, E[...] Extension 2, are to vacate the premises by no later than 17h00 on 31 July 2023.
  • If the First and Second Respondent, and any other persons or entities occupying the premises, fail to vacate by the deadline, the Sheriff (or any authorised Deputy Sheriff) is authorised to take reasonable steps to facilitate eviction.