Nkosi and Others v The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2017/37231) [2021] ZAGPJHC 809 (10 December 2021)

Nkosi and Others v The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2017/37231) [2021] ZAGPJHC 809 (10 December 2021)

The court found that the respondents failed to comply with the order of 15 October 2018, as the report filed was not under oath and did not address the required steps taken after the order. The respondents' actions, including delayed council resolutions and lack of meaningful engagement, amounted to wilful disregard of the court's directives. The continued accrual of rates and taxes and absence of infrastructure installation further evidenced non-compliance. The joinder of the fourth, fifth, and sixth respondents was justified due to their statutory responsibilities and the need for effective supervision of the order's implementation. The respondents' conduct warranted a punitive costs...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPJHC 809
Parties
Applicant: Pamela Duduzile Nkosi; Applicant: Sibongile Goodness Njapa; Applicant: Benjamin Semakaleng Raboshaba; Applicant: Lebohang Steven Motsumi; Applicant: Patrick Mandla Nxumalo; Applicant: Nikeziwe Dorries Nhleko; Applicant: Rendani Virginia Ramuhashi; Applicant: Edward Rabage Motseothata; Applicant: Zwelakhe Manana; Respondent: The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Johannesburg Property Company; Respondent: Department of Human Settlements; Respondent: Tshepo Freddy Mokataka; Respondent: The Municipal Manager; Respondent: The Mayor of the City of Johannesburg
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2021
Case Number
2017/37231
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Judgment on Contempt and Joinder
Outcome
Application for contempt granted; joinder of additional respondents ordered; respondents found in contempt; punitive costs awarded.
Judges
F Karachi
Legal Topics
Right of Access to Basic Services, Municipal Service Delivery, Contempt of Court, Joinder of Parties, Enforcement of Court Orders
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Right of Access to Basic Services Municipal Service Delivery Contempt of Court Joinder of Parties Enforcement of Court Orders

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

Parties

Pamela Duduzile Nkosi

Applicant

Sibongile Goodness Njapa

Applicant

Benjamin Semakaleng Raboshaba

Applicant

Lebohang Steven Motsumi

Applicant

Patrick Mandla Nxumalo

Applicant

Nikeziwe Dorries Nhleko

Applicant

Rendani Virginia Ramuhashi

Applicant

Edward Rabage Motseothata

Applicant

Zwelakhe Manana

Applicant

The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Johannesburg Property Company

Respondent

Department of Human Settlements

Respondent

Tshepo Freddy Mokataka

Respondent

The Municipal Manager

Respondent

The Mayor of the City of Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Judgment on Contempt and Joinder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first and second respondents complied with the court order of 15 October 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the respondents constitutes contempt of court.
  3. 3 Whether the joinder of the fourth, fifth and sixth respondents is appropriate given their statutory responsibilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents failed to comply with the order of 15 October 2018, as the report filed was not under oath and did not address the required steps taken after the order. The respondents' actions, including delayed council resolutions and lack of meaningful engagement, amounted to wilful disregard of the court's directives. The continued accrual of rates and taxes and absence of infrastructure installation further evidenced non-compliance. The joinder of the fourth, fifth, and sixth respondents was justified due to their statutory responsibilities and the need for effective supervision of the order's implementation. The respondents' conduct warranted a punitive costs...

Court Disposition

Application for contempt granted; joinder of additional respondents ordered; respondents found in contempt; punitive costs awarded.

Orders

  • The fourth, fifth and sixth respondents are joined as parties to these proceedings.
  • It is declared that the first and second respondents are in contempt of the court order of Justice Mudau on 15 October 2018.