Pick-N-Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Liberty Group Limited and Others (31739/14) [2014] ZAGPPHC 321; 2015 (4) SA 241 (GP) (5 June 2014)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Application

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interim interdict restraining the respondents from breaching the lease exclusivity clause pending arbitration.
2. 2 Whether the fourth respondent unlawfully and intentionally interfered with the applicant's contractual rights.
3. 3 Whether the requirements for interim relief, including prima facie right, irreparable harm, balance of convenience, and absence of alternative remedy, are satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant demonstrated a prima facie right to exclusivity under the lease agreement, and that the fourth respondent's intended expansion could render the Game Store a supermarket, breaching the exclusivity clause. The evidence showed that the fourth respondent was aware of the dispute and the applicant's objection, yet continued with its development. The court held that the requirements for interim relief were satisfied: the applicant faced irreparable harm not compensable by damages, and the balance of convenience favoured the applicant, as the prejudice to it would likely be greater than that suffered by the fourth respondent if relief were granted. The court...

Court Disposition

Application for interim interdict granted; fourth respondent joined as a party; costs reserved.

Orders

• The fourth respondent is joined as a party to this application.
• An interim interdict is granted prohibiting the first and second respondents from breaching their contractual obligations to the applicant by permitting or allowing the fourth respondent to operate a Game FoodCo within the existing Game Store at Liberty Midlands Mall, Pietermaritzburg, pending the outcome of...