Samancor Manganese (Pty) Ltd v Azam Fabrication CC (2018/85581) [2019] ZAGPPHC 139 (10 May 2019)

Samancor Manganese (Pty) Ltd v Azam Fabrication CC (2018/85581) [2019] ZAGPPHC 139 (10 May 2019)

The respondent breached the court order by failing to vacate the workshop by 31 March 2019. The arbitration clause does not bar contempt proceedings, which serve to uphold judicial authority. Azam's reliance on liens is unfounded, as it waived such rights in the SLA and cannot claim a lien over its own property. The urgency of the application is justified by Azam's ongoing non-compliance. Although Azam's reasons for non-compliance do not amount to wilful contempt, they are insufficient to justify continued occupation. The respondent is declared in breach of the order and must vacate the premises by 30 May 2019. Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale to mark the court's...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 139
Parties
Applicant: Samancor Manganese (Pty) Ltd t/a South 32; Respondent: Azam Fabrication CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 May 2019
Case Number
2018/85581
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application for Contempt and Eviction
Outcome
Application granted. Respondent declared in breach of the court order and ordered to vacate the premises by 30 May 2019. Costs awarded against respondent on attorney and client scale.
Judges
Ingrid Opperman
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Eviction, Arbitration Clause, Urgent Interdict, Occupational Health and Safety
Civil Procedure Land and Property Contempt of Court Eviction Arbitration Clause Urgent Interdict Occupational Health and Safety

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

Parties

Samancor Manganese (Pty) Ltd t/a South 32

Applicant

Azam Fabrication CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Urgent Application for Contempt and Eviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is in contempt of the court order granted on 5 December 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to remain in occupation of the workshop premises after termination of the Service Level Agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration clause or alleged liens preclude enforcement of the court order.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent breached the court order by failing to vacate the workshop by 31 March 2019. The arbitration clause does not bar contempt proceedings, which serve to uphold judicial authority. Azam's reliance on liens is unfounded, as it waived such rights in the SLA and cannot claim a lien over its own property. The urgency of the application is justified by Azam's ongoing non-compliance. Although Azam's reasons for non-compliance do not amount to wilful contempt, they are insufficient to justify continued occupation. The respondent is declared in breach of the order and must vacate the premises by 30 May 2019. Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale to mark the court's...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Respondent declared in breach of the court order and ordered to vacate the premises by 30 May 2019. Costs awarded against respondent on attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • This application is enrolled as an urgent application.
  • The respondent is declared to be in breach of the order handed down on 5 December 2018.