Reiners and Others Die Pinkster Protestante Kerk and Another (A774/2016, 83902/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 354 (9 May 2018)

Reiners and Others Die Pinkster Protestante Kerk and Another (A774/2016, 83902/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 354 (9 May 2018)

The appeal was upheld because the court a quo granted relief on a basis not pleaded or ventilated in the affidavits, specifically relying on the Alienation of Land Act when the applicant had not made out a case under that statute. The central issue was ownership of the properties, and the evidence showed that the Riversdale congregation, not the applicant, was the owner. The applicant and the Riversdale congregation were separate entities, and the congregation was never bound by the applicant's constitution. The court a quo was not entitled to decide the matter on an unpleaded issue, and its order could not stand.

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 354
Parties
Appellant: Jacobus Petrus Reiners; Appellant: Mollie Susanna Elizabeth Reiners; Appellant: Jedidja Community Centre (NPC) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Die Pinkster Protestante Kerk; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 May 2018
Case Number
A774/2016, 83902/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of the Court a Quo
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs.
Judges
H.J Fabricius, S. Potterill, D.S. Molefe
Legal Topics
Ownership of Immovable Property, Alienation of Land Act, Motion Proceedings, Pleadings and Issues
Land and Property Civil Procedure Ownership of Immovable Property Alienation of Land Act Motion Proceedings Pleadings and Issues

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacobus Petrus Reiners

Appellant

Mollie Susanna Elizabeth Reiners

Appellant

Jedidja Community Centre (NPC) (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Die Pinkster Protestante Kerk

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of the Court a Quo

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was the owner of the immovable properties in question.
  2. 2 Whether the court a quo was entitled to grant relief based on the Alienation of Land Act when it was not pleaded.
  3. 3 Whether the court a quo decided the matter on issues not raised in the pleadings.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was upheld because the court a quo granted relief on a basis not pleaded or ventilated in the affidavits, specifically relying on the Alienation of Land Act when the applicant had not made out a case under that statute. The central issue was ownership of the properties, and the evidence showed that the Riversdale congregation, not the applicant, was the owner. The applicant and the Riversdale congregation were separate entities, and the congregation was never bound by the applicant's constitution. The court a quo was not entitled to decide the matter on an unpleaded issue, and its order could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: 'The application is dismissed with costs.'