Ndamase v First Rand Bank Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (024968/24) [2025] ZAGPPHC 297 (18 March 2025)

Ndamase v First Rand Bank Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (024968/24) [2025] ZAGPPHC 297 (18 March 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as there was no evidence of a valid lease agreement between the applicant and the first respondent after the property was sold in execution. The demand for rental payment did not constitute ratification or continuation of a lease agreement. The applicant's submissions regarding rectification were unsupported by evidence and did not comply with legal requirements for such relief. The cumulative effect of the applicant's lack of diligence, inadequate explanation...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 297
Parties
Applicant: Mandlakayise Prince Ndamase; Respondent: First Rand Bank Ltd; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 March 2025
Case Number
024968/24
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 12 November 2024.
Outcome
Application for condonation and leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Lesufi
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Lease Agreement Dispute, Eviction, Rectification of Contract, Prospects of Success on Appeal
Land and Property Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Lease Agreement Dispute Eviction Rectification of Contract Prospects of Success on 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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mandlakayise Prince Ndamase

Applicant

First Rand Bank Ltd

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Delivered on 12 November 2024.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for condonation of non-compliance with time limits.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal has reasonable prospects of success.
  3. 3 Whether a valid lease agreement existed between the applicant and the first respondent after the property was sold in execution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as there was no evidence of a valid lease agreement between the applicant and the first respondent after the property was sold in execution. The demand for rental payment did not constitute ratification or continuation of a lease agreement. The applicant's submissions regarding rectification were unsupported by evidence and did not comply with legal requirements for such relief. The cumulative effect of the applicant's lack of diligence, inadequate explanation...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation and leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application for condonation is dismissed.
  • Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.