Roman v Damon and Others (1601/09) [2009] ZAWCHC 63 (2 April 2009)

Roman v Damon and Others (1601/09) [2009] ZAWCHC 63 (2 April 2009)

The applicant failed to establish a prima facie right to an interim interdict over the proceeds of sale of the Mitchells Plain property. Although some payments were made by the applicant to assist with bond repayments, there was no agreement that the property or its proceeds would serve as security for the debt. The applicant did not demonstrate a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, as there was no evidence that the first respondent intended to dissipate the proceeds to defeat his claims. The first respondent offered reasonable undertakings to retain a portion of the proceeds and not to encumber the Delft property. Granting interim relief would severely prejudice the first...

Citation
[2009] ZAWCHC 63
Parties
Applicant: Christopher Edward Martin Roman; Respondent: Sharon Damon; Respondent: BFP Attorneys; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 April 2009
Case Number
1601/09
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict Pending Action
Outcome
Application for interim relief dismissed with costs.
Judges
D H Zondi
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Prima Facie Right, Irreparable Harm, Balance of Convenience, Adequate Housing, Security for Debt
Civil Procedure Land and Property Interim Interdict Prima Facie Right Irreparable Harm Balance of Convenience Adequate Housing Security for Debt

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Edward Martin Roman

Applicant

Sharon Damon

Respondent

BFP Attorneys

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict Pending Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie right to an interim interdict over proceeds of sale pending civil proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has shown a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm if interim relief is not granted.
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting the interim relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish a prima facie right to an interim interdict over the proceeds of sale of the Mitchells Plain property. Although some payments were made by the applicant to assist with bond repayments, there was no agreement that the property or its proceeds would serve as security for the debt. The applicant did not demonstrate a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, as there was no evidence that the first respondent intended to dissipate the proceeds to defeat his claims. The first respondent offered reasonable undertakings to retain a portion of the proceeds and not to encumber the Delft property. Granting interim relief would severely prejudice the first...

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for interim relief is dismissed with costs.