Naidoo v FTX Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (74329/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1026 (3 December 2015)

Naidoo v FTX Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (74329/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1026 (3 December 2015)

The court found that the applicant's occupation of the property, her lack of ownership, and her reliance on a state pension all supported the application of ESTA. The authorities cited by the applicant's counsel established that the presumption in section 2(2) of ESTA applies broadly, placing the onus on the eviction applicant to prove the land does not fall within ESTA's scope. The court concluded that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal and granted leave to appeal to the Full Bench.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 1026
Parties
Applicant: Mogaetsi Seunah Naidoo; Respondent: FTX Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Steve Tshwete Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 December 2015
Case Number
74329/14
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Order
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted to the Full Bench of the Gauteng Division.
Judges
Fourie
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Presumption of Tenure, Onus of Proof, Leave to Appeal
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Extension of Security of Tenure Act Presumption of Tenure Onus of Proof Leave to Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mogaetsi Seunah Naidoo

Applicant

FTX Investments (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Steve Tshwete Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the presumption in section 2(2) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act applies to the applicant's occupation of the property.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding the eviction order.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's status as owner or occupier affects the application of ESTA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's occupation of the property, her lack of ownership, and her reliance on a state pension all supported the application of ESTA. The authorities cited by the applicant's counsel established that the presumption in section 2(2) of ESTA applies broadly, placing the onus on the eviction applicant to prove the land does not fall within ESTA's scope. The court concluded that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal and granted leave to appeal to the Full Bench.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted to the Full Bench of the Gauteng Division.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to appeal to the Full Bench of this Division.
  • The costs of this application are to be costs in the appeal.