Samancor Chrome Limited v Mathiba (45209/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 873 (17 September 2015)

Samancor Chrome Limited v Mathiba (45209/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 873 (17 September 2015)

The respondent breached the lease agreement by failing to pay rent and refused to vacate the property after lawful termination. The applicant complied with the contractual and statutory requirements for eviction, including proper notice and compliance with section 4(2) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act. The respondent's alleged unfair dismissal and the pending Labour Court dispute are irrelevant to the determination of his right to occupy the property. Non-joinder of the respondent's wife is not fatal as she was not a party to the lease. The respondent's continued occupation is unlawful and the applicant is entitled to an eviction order and payment of arrear rental and daily...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 873
Parties
Applicant: Samancor Chrome Limited; Respondent: Tebogo Moses Mathiba
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2015
Case Number
45209/14
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Eviction order granted against the respondent; counter-application dismissed with costs.
Judges
MD Mohlamonyane
Legal Topics
Eviction, Arrear Rental, Lease Termination, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Non Joinder, Holding Over
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Arrear Rental Lease Termination Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Non Joinder Holding Over

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samancor Chrome Limited

Applicant

Tebogo Moses Mathiba

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be evicted from the applicant's property after termination of the lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant complied with statutory and contractual requirements for eviction.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's alleged unfair dismissal affects his right to occupy the property.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent breached the lease agreement by failing to pay rent and refused to vacate the property after lawful termination. The applicant complied with the contractual and statutory requirements for eviction, including proper notice and compliance with section 4(2) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act. The respondent's alleged unfair dismissal and the pending Labour Court dispute are irrelevant to the determination of his right to occupy the property. Non-joinder of the respondent's wife is not fatal as she was not a party to the lease. The respondent's continued occupation is unlawful and the applicant is entitled to an eviction order and payment of arrear rental and daily...

Court Disposition

Eviction order granted against the respondent; counter-application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The respondent and any person occupying through him are ordered to vacate house number […] A[…] Avenue, Moonooi, North West Province.
  • Eviction must take place within thirty calendar days after the granting of this order.