National Scrap Metal v Murray & Roberts (809/2011) [2011] ZASCA 250 (29 March 2011)

National Scrap Metal v Murray & Roberts (809/2011) [2011] ZASCA 250 (29 March 2011)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants' allegations regarding the oral lease agreement could not be rejected on the papers as being so far-fetched or untenable as to justify summary dismissal. The court found that there was a genuine dispute of fact concerning the authority of the respondents' agent and the existence of the oral lease, which could not be resolved without oral evidence. The prior conduct of the parties, the informal nature of their dealings, and the substantial investment made by the appellants supported the plausibility of their version. The high court erred in granting the eviction order without referring the matter for oral evidence. Consequently, the...

Citation
[2012] ZASCA 47
Parties
Appellant: National Scrap Metal (Cape Town) (Pty) Ltd; Appellant: Murec Crushing and Milling (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Murray & Roberts Ltd; Respondent: Murray & Roberts Steel (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Cape Town Iron and Steel Works (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2012
Case Number
809/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Eviction Order
Outcome
Appeal upheld; eviction application dismissed.
Judges
Mthiyane, Cloete, Leach, Tshiqi, Wallis
Legal Topics
Eviction, Oral Lease Agreement, Dispute of Fact, Motion Proceedings, Authority of Agent
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Oral Lease Agreement Dispute of Fact Motion Proceedings Authority of Agent

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

Parties

National Scrap Metal (Cape Town) (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Murec Crushing and Milling (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Murray & Roberts Ltd

Respondent

Murray & Roberts Steel (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Cape Town Iron and Steel Works (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disputed allegations of fact regarding the existence of an oral lease agreement could be rejected on the papers.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants were entitled to remain in occupation of the property based on an alleged oral lease.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' agent had authority to conclude a long-term lease agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants' allegations regarding the oral lease agreement could not be rejected on the papers as being so far-fetched or untenable as to justify summary dismissal. The court found that there was a genuine dispute of fact concerning the authority of the respondents' agent and the existence of the oral lease, which could not be resolved without oral evidence. The prior conduct of the parties, the informal nature of their dealings, and the substantial investment made by the appellants supported the plausibility of their version. The high court erred in granting the eviction order without referring the matter for oral evidence. Consequently, the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; eviction application dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds, and the order of the high court is set aside and replaced with dismissal of the application.
  • The applicants are to pay the respondents' costs of the interlocutory proceedings on 31 August 2011 and 13 September 2011, jointly and severally, including costs of two counsel where employed.