Romanco 5 (Pty) Ltd v Zono (2267/2016) [2016] ZAECPEHC 78 (13 December 2016)

Romanco 5 (Pty) Ltd v Zono (2267/2016) [2016] ZAECPEHC 78 (13 December 2016)

The applicant is the lawful owner of the property and the respondent has failed to establish any legal right to remain in occupation. The respondent's claims of oral and written lease agreements are unsupported and contradictory, and she has not paid rent to the applicant or previous owner. The respondent's personal circumstances, including her status as a single mother and medical practitioner, do not justify continued unlawful occupation, especially as she has means to secure alternative accommodation. The requirements of PIE have been complied with, and there is no material dispute warranting mediation. It is just and equitable to grant the eviction order, allowing the respondent...

Citation
[2016] ZAECPEHC 78
Parties
Applicant: Romanco 5 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Nomabandla Patience Zono
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 December 2016
Case Number
2267/2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Eviction Application Under Pie; Opposed Motion
Outcome
Eviction order granted against the respondent and all persons occupying through her; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
J W Eksteen
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Eviction Proceedings, Oral Lease Agreement, Just and Equitable Order
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Eviction Proceedings Oral Lease Agreement Just and Equitable Order

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

Parties

Romanco 5 (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Nomabandla Patience Zono

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Eviction Application Under Pie; Opposed Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to evict the respondent from the property under section 4 of PIE.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has any legal right to occupy the property.
  3. 3 Whether it is just and equitable to grant an eviction order considering the respondent's circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is the lawful owner of the property and the respondent has failed to establish any legal right to remain in occupation. The respondent's claims of oral and written lease agreements are unsupported and contradictory, and she has not paid rent to the applicant or previous owner. The respondent's personal circumstances, including her status as a single mother and medical practitioner, do not justify continued unlawful occupation, especially as she has means to secure alternative accommodation. The requirements of PIE have been complied with, and there is no material dispute warranting mediation. It is just and equitable to grant the eviction order, allowing the respondent...

Court Disposition

Eviction order granted against the respondent and all persons occupying through her; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent and all other persons occupying the premises at [....] L. R., Humerail, Port Elizabeth, erf [....] Humewood, must vacate by close of business on 31 January 2017.
  • The Sheriff is authorised to evict the respondent and all other persons if they fail to comply with the order.