Nano and Another v Mosima and Others (53521/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 163 (8 February 2017)

Nano and Another v Mosima and Others (53521/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 163 (8 February 2017)

The court found that both the Deed of Sale and the Memorandum of Agreement were void ab initio due to statutory prohibitions under the Agricultural Holdings (Transvaal) Registration Act and non-compliance with section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act. The agreements failed to meet statutory formalities, including proper identification of parties and a clear description of the property. As a result, the contracts were unenforceable and conferred no rights of action. The applicants, having performed under the void agreements, were entitled to recover the net difference between their payments and those made by the respondents. The respondents were found to be in unlawful occupation of the...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 163
Parties
Applicant: Sipho Jerry Nano; Applicant: Bongile Linah Kumalo; Respondent: Tshokolo Herman Mosima; Respondent: Kebogile Euritu Scott; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 February 2017
Case Number
53521/15
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Application granted. Agreements declared null and void. Respondents ordered to pay R233,000.00 and vacate the property.
Judges
Raulinga
Legal Topics
Alienation of Land Act, Statutory Prohibition, Void Contract, Recovery of Payments, Illegal Eviction
Land and Property Civil Procedure Alienation of Land Act Statutory Prohibition Void Contract Recovery of Payments 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sipho Jerry Nano

Applicant

Bongile Linah Kumalo

Applicant

Tshokolo Herman Mosima

Respondent

Kebogile Euritu Scott

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deed of Sale and Memorandum of Agreement between the parties are null and void due to statutory prohibitions and non-compliance with statutory formalities.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to recover payments made under void agreements.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents are unlawfully occupying the property and should be evicted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the Deed of Sale and the Memorandum of Agreement were void ab initio due to statutory prohibitions under the Agricultural Holdings (Transvaal) Registration Act and non-compliance with section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act. The agreements failed to meet statutory formalities, including proper identification of parties and a clear description of the property. As a result, the contracts were unenforceable and conferred no rights of action. The applicants, having performed under the void agreements, were entitled to recover the net difference between their payments and those made by the respondents. The respondents were found to be in unlawful occupation of the...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Agreements declared null and void. Respondents ordered to pay R233,000.00 and vacate the property.

Orders

  • The two agreements concluded between the parties are declared null and void for infringing statutory prohibitions and lack of statutory compliance.
  • The respondents are ordered to pay to the applicants an amount of R233,000.00 on or before 30 March 2017.