Rathabeng Properties (Pty) Ltd v Mohlaoli and Others (18957/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 8 (15 February 2021)

Rathabeng Properties (Pty) Ltd v Mohlaoli and Others (18957/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 8 (15 February 2021)

The applicant, as the registered owner, is entitled to evict the respondents from the property. The sale in execution was valid, as the court order predates Rule 46A and Mokebe, which do not apply retrospectively. The first respondent perempted any challenge to the sale by accepting the surplus proceeds. The pending rescission application is abandoned and does not constitute a defence. The first respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence of personal circumstances to justify refusal of eviction. The COVID-19 regulations do not bar the grant of an eviction order but require the court to consider whether and for how long to suspend execution. Given the sparse evidence and the interests...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPJHC 8
Parties
Applicant: Rathabeng Properties (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Sammy Sebel Mohlaoli; Respondent: Pulane Alice Ramokone; Respondent: All occupiers of Unit 77 of SS Terra Nova, Needwood Ext 7, situated at 378 First Road, Needwood Ext 7; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 February 2021
Case Number
18957/2019
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Judgment on Opposed Eviction Application
Outcome
Eviction order granted against the first and second respondents and all those claiming occupation through them, with execution suspended subject to COVID-19 regulations.
Judges
Gilbert AJ
Legal Topics
Eviction Proceedings, Sectional Title Scheme, Sale in Execution, Covid19 Regulations, Just and Equitable Eviction, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Proceedings Sectional Title Scheme Sale in Execution Covid19 Regulations Just and Equitable Eviction Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rathabeng Properties (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Sammy Sebel Mohlaoli

Respondent

Pulane Alice Ramokone

Respondent

All occupiers of Unit 77 of SS Terra Nova, Needwood Ext 7, situated at 378 First Road, Needwood Ext 7

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Judgment on Opposed Eviction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an eviction order against the respondents from the property.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a reserve price in the sale in execution vitiates the sale and subsequent transfer.
  3. 3 Whether pending or previous rescission proceedings preclude eviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant, as the registered owner, is entitled to evict the respondents from the property. The sale in execution was valid, as the court order predates Rule 46A and Mokebe, which do not apply retrospectively. The first respondent perempted any challenge to the sale by accepting the surplus proceeds. The pending rescission application is abandoned and does not constitute a defence. The first respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence of personal circumstances to justify refusal of eviction. The COVID-19 regulations do not bar the grant of an eviction order but require the court to consider whether and for how long to suspend execution. Given the sparse evidence and the interests...

Court Disposition

Eviction order granted against the first and second respondents and all those claiming occupation through them, with execution suspended subject to COVID-19 regulations.

Orders

  • The first and second respondents, and all those claiming occupation through, by or under them are evicted from Unit 77 of SS Terra Nova, Needwood Ext 7 situated at 375 First Road, Needwood Ext 7.
  • Execution of the eviction order is suspended until fourteen days after the end of Adjusted Level 3 (or Level 4 or 5 if immediately following), after which the respondents must vacate the property.