Rica Piggery and Abattoir (Pty) Ltd v Derello (LCC 07R/2010) [2010] ZALCC 23 (9 June 2010)

Rica Piggery and Abattoir (Pty) Ltd v Derello (LCC 07R/2010) [2010] ZALCC 23 (9 June 2010)

The court confirmed the eviction order as the requirements of ESTA had been met. However, it found no compelling reason to depart from the established practice of not awarding costs against unsuccessful parties in social interest litigation. The respondent resisted eviction in good faith, had longstanding residence on the farm, and limited financial means. Equity and fairness did not justify a costs order. The dates for vacating and execution of the eviction were substituted to reflect the lapse of time since the original magistrate's order. No order as to costs was made.

Citation
[2010] ZALCC 23
Parties
Applicant: Rica Piggery and Abattoir (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Phatsoane Moses Dirello
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2010
Case Number
LCC 07R/2010
Procedural Posture
Automatic Review / Review of Magistrate's Eviction Order
Outcome
Eviction order confirmed with substituted dates; no order as to costs.
Judges
N Saba
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Eviction, Costs Award, Public Interest Litigation
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Eviction Costs Award Public Interest Litigation

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rica Piggery and Abattoir (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Phatsoane Moses Dirello

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Automatic Review / Review of Magistrate's Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the eviction order granted by the Magistrate complied with the requirements of ESTA.
  2. 2 Whether a costs order should be made against the respondent in eviction proceedings under ESTA.
  3. 3 Whether considerations of equity and fairness justify a departure from the general rule on costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court confirmed the eviction order as the requirements of ESTA had been met. However, it found no compelling reason to depart from the established practice of not awarding costs against unsuccessful parties in social interest litigation. The respondent resisted eviction in good faith, had longstanding residence on the farm, and limited financial means. Equity and fairness did not justify a costs order. The dates for vacating and execution of the eviction were substituted to reflect the lapse of time since the original magistrate's order. No order as to costs was made.

Court Disposition

Eviction order confirmed with substituted dates; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The respondent is to vacate the premises by 12 July 2010 in terms of section 12(1)(a) of ESTA, if he has not yet done so.
  • If the respondent has not vacated by 12 July 2010, the eviction order may be carried out on 19 July 2010 in terms of section 12(1)(b) of ESTA.