Pelser v Annor N.O (40069/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 973 (7 November 2017)

Pelser v Annor N.O (40069/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 973 (7 November 2017)

The applicant failed to demonstrate good cause for rescission of the eviction judgment as required by Rule 31(2)(b). He admitted to breaching the lease agreement by withholding rent, and his explanation did not constitute a bona fide defence. The application was found to be a delaying tactic, and no material dispute of fact was raised. The court concluded that the applicant was not entitled to the relief sought and dismissed the application for rescission with costs on the attorney and client scale as provided in the lease agreement.

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 973
Parties
Applicant: Willie Pelser; Respondent: Samuel Yaw Annor N.O
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 November 2017
Case Number
40069/2016
Procedural Posture
Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Eviction Order
Outcome
Application for rescission of judgment dismissed with costs on the attorney and client scale.
Judges
Mudau
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Eviction, Lease Agreement Breach, Rule 31 2 B, Attorney and Client Costs
Civil Procedure Land and Property Rescission of Judgment Eviction Lease Agreement Breach Rule 31 2 B Attorney and Client Costs

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Willie Pelser

Applicant

Samuel Yaw Annor N.O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rescission Application / Application for Rescission of Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for rescission of the eviction judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a bona fide defence to the respondent's claim.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's failure to pay rent justified cancellation and eviction under the lease agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate good cause for rescission of the eviction judgment as required by Rule 31(2)(b). He admitted to breaching the lease agreement by withholding rent, and his explanation did not constitute a bona fide defence. The application was found to be a delaying tactic, and no material dispute of fact was raised. The court concluded that the applicant was not entitled to the relief sought and dismissed the application for rescission with costs on the attorney and client scale as provided in the lease agreement.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission of judgment dismissed with costs on the attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The application for rescission of judgment is dismissed with costs on the scale as between attorney and client.