Mulea v Fourie NO (54595/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 61 (18 February 2013)

Mulea v Fourie NO (54595/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 61 (18 February 2013)

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The court found that proper notice in terms of section 4(2) of PIE was given and received, and that the issue of service by the Sheriff was not raised in the original proceedings. The lease agreement had expired due to the applicant's breach for non-payment of rent, and notice of termination was given. The applicant did not provide any information regarding alternative accommodation as contemplated by section 4(7) of PIE, and she was not indigent. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal was a delaying tactic and that there were...

Citation
[2013] ZAGPPHC 61
Parties
Applicant: M C Mulea; Respondent: J F Fourie N.O.
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 February 2013
Case Number
54595/2012
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Summary Judgment and Eviction Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
P C Van der Byl
Legal Topics
Eviction, Summary Judgment, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Lease Termination
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Summary Judgment Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Lease Termination

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

Parties

M C Mulea

Applicant

J F Fourie N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Summary Judgment and Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was properly served with notice in terms of section 4(2) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (PIE).
  2. 2 Whether the lease agreement was lawfully terminated and whether proper notice was given.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of section 4(7) of PIE regarding alternative accommodation were met.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The court found that proper notice in terms of section 4(2) of PIE was given and received, and that the issue of service by the Sheriff was not raised in the original proceedings. The lease agreement had expired due to the applicant's breach for non-payment of rent, and notice of termination was given. The applicant did not provide any information regarding alternative accommodation as contemplated by section 4(7) of PIE, and she was not indigent. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal was a delaying tactic and that there were...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

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