Property & Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Swaanswyk Horse Owners & Riders Association (8562/2007) [2011] ZAWCHC 338 (16 August 2011)

Property & Marketing (Pty) Ltd v Swaanswyk Horse Owners & Riders Association (8562/2007) [2011] ZAWCHC 338 (16 August 2011)

The court found that the respondent's occupation of the property was based on a lease agreement that expired in 2006. There was no evidence that the administrator or local authority imposed a binding condition restricting the use of the property to equestrian purposes. The letter relied upon by the respondent was merely a suggestion and not a mandatory condition. The respondent failed to establish any right to remain in occupation beyond the lease period. The applicant was entitled to an eviction order and costs, including the cost of two counsel and costs on an attorney and client scale, as provided for in the lease agreement and justified by the complexity of the matter.

Citation
[2011] ZAWCHC 338
Parties
Applicant: GE Property & Marketing (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Swaanswyk Horse Owners & Riders Association
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 August 2011
Case Number
8562/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; respondent and all occupants to be evicted; costs awarded to applicant on attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Allie
Legal Topics
Eviction, Lease Expiry, Zoning Conditions, Use and Occupation, Attorney and Client Costs
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Lease Expiry Zoning Conditions Use and Occupation 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GE Property & Marketing (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Swaanswyk Horse Owners & Riders Association

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent has a right to remain in occupation of the property after expiry of the lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether any condition was imposed by the local authority or administrator limiting the use of the property to equestrian purposes.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to an eviction order and costs on attorney and client scale.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's occupation of the property was based on a lease agreement that expired in 2006. There was no evidence that the administrator or local authority imposed a binding condition restricting the use of the property to equestrian purposes. The letter relied upon by the respondent was merely a suggestion and not a mandatory condition. The respondent failed to establish any right to remain in occupation beyond the lease period. The applicant was entitled to an eviction order and costs, including the cost of two counsel and costs on an attorney and client scale, as provided for in the lease agreement and justified by the complexity of the matter.

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondent and all occupants to be evicted; costs awarded to applicant on attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The respondent and all occupants occupying under its aegis are evicted from the property.
  • The respondent is directed to pay the applicant's costs, including the costs of two counsel and on an attorney and client scale.