Radebe v Eastern Transvaal Development Board; Mthethwa v Eastern Transvaal Development Board; Jele v Eastern Transvaal Development Board (431/86,429/86,430/86) [1988] ZASCA 8; [1988] 2 All SA 271 (A) (11 March 1988)

Radebe v Eastern Transvaal Development Board; Mthethwa v Eastern Transvaal Development Board; Jele v Eastern Transvaal Development Board (431/86,429/86,430/86) [1988] ZASCA 8; [1988] 2 All SA 271 (A) (11 March 1988)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants failed to allege or prove any facts establishing a right to remain in occupation under the regulations governing Black residential areas. Their answering affidavits contained only legal conclusions, not the necessary factual averments. The regulations do not abolish the owner's common law right to vindicate possession; rather, the statutory procedures for eviction are cumulative and do not replace the rei vindicatio. Regulation 15(4)(b) confers a right on the superintendent to apply for eviction, but does not preclude the owner from exercising the common law remedy. Regulation 47(2) provides for eviction following a criminal conviction,...

Citation
[1988] ZASCA 8
Parties
Appellant: Timothy Radebe; Appellant: N B Mthethwa; Appellant: Joseph Jele; Respondent: Eastern Transvaal Development Board
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 March 1988
Case Number
431/86,429/86,430/86
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Opposed Applications for Ejectment; Condonation for Late Filing Granted
Outcome
Appeals dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by the application for condonation.
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, Nestadt, Nicholas, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Rei Vindicatio, Statutory Eviction Procedure, Black Communities Development Act, Regulations on Black Residential Areas, Pleading Requirements
Land and Property Civil Procedure Rei Vindicatio Statutory Eviction Procedure Black Communities Development Act Regulations on Black Residential Areas Pleading Requirements

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Timothy Radebe

Appellant

N B Mthethwa

Appellant

Joseph Jele

Appellant

Eastern Transvaal Development Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Opposed Applications for Ejectment; Condonation for Late Filing Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the regulations governing Black residential areas displace the owner's common law right to vindicate possession of property.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants' answering affidavits disclosed facts sufficient to establish a defence under the regulations.
  3. 3 Whether the statutory eviction procedures are exclusive remedies, or cumulative with the common law rei vindicatio.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants failed to allege or prove any facts establishing a right to remain in occupation under the regulations governing Black residential areas. Their answering affidavits contained only legal conclusions, not the necessary factual averments. The regulations do not abolish the owner's common law right to vindicate possession; rather, the statutory procedures for eviction are cumulative and do not replace the rei vindicatio. Regulation 15(4)(b) confers a right on the superintendent to apply for eviction, but does not preclude the owner from exercising the common law remedy. Regulation 47(2) provides for eviction following a criminal conviction,...

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by the application for condonation.

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed with costs, including any occasioned by the application for condonation.