Mohlala and Others v Mashale and Another (A3014/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 355 (17 September 2019)

Mohlala and Others v Mashale and Another (A3014/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 355 (17 September 2019)

The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate had provided reasons for the eviction order and had considered the relevant statutory requirements under the PIE Act. The occupiers were properly cited as parties and legally represented. No steps were taken to substitute the deceased first appellant with the executor of his estate, and the factual position regarding the pending application for leave to appeal was unclear and did not warrant setting aside the eviction order. The appellants failed to demonstrate any prospects of success on appeal, and even if condonation for late filing were granted, the appeal would fail on its merits.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 355
Parties
Appellant: Mohlala Chabane Alton; Appellant: All Other Occupiers; Respondent: Mashale Hilda Nthabiseng; Respondent: Emfuleni Local Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2019
Case Number
A3014/2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Eviction Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Judges
F Dippenaar, U Bhoola
Legal Topics
Eviction, Condonation, Joinder of Parties, Unlawful Occupation, Prevention of Illegal Eviction
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Condonation Joinder of Parties Unlawful Occupation Prevention of Illegal Eviction

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohlala Chabane Alton

Appellant

All Other Occupiers

Appellant

Mashale Hilda Nthabiseng

Respondent

Emfuleni Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in granting the eviction order without providing reasons and findings as required by the PIE Act.
  2. 2 Whether the eviction order was improperly granted against the first appellant who had passed away prior to the order.
  3. 3 Whether the occupiers of the property should have been joined to the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the magistrate had provided reasons for the eviction order and had considered the relevant statutory requirements under the PIE Act. The occupiers were properly cited as parties and legally represented. No steps were taken to substitute the deceased first appellant with the executor of his estate, and the factual position regarding the pending application for leave to appeal was unclear and did not warrant setting aside the eviction order. The appellants failed to demonstrate any prospects of success on appeal, and even if condonation for late filing were granted, the appeal would fail on its merits.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.