Seale and Others v Kruger N.O and Others (36311/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 431 (11 August 2020)

Seale and Others v Kruger N.O and Others (36311/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 431 (11 August 2020)

The court found that the applicants were not spoliated but evicted in terms of an existing and valid court order granted on 24 March 2017, which interdicted unlawful occupation and authorised the Sheriff to evict trespassers. The applicants' occupation of the property was recent and lacked the permanence required to qualify as a 'home' under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act. The eviction was carried out in accordance with the court order and the applicants failed to provide sufficient particulars regarding their alleged vulnerability. The court was not convinced that an order for suspension of the eviction should be granted, and accordingly...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 431
Parties
Applicant: D Seale; Applicant: J Mothapi; Applicant: J Moloya; Applicant: E Monageng; Applicant: C Boshomane; Applicant: G T Sephurane; Applicant: L N & 441 Others; Respondent: A G Kruger N.O.; Respondent: P B Kruger N.O.; Respondent: Tambura 69 Trust; Respondent: National Commissioner of Police; Respondent: The Station Commander, Silverton SAPS; Respondent: City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: The Sheriff
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 August 2020
Case Number
36311/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
D S Fourie
Legal Topics
Spoliation, Eviction, Urgent Interdict, Unlawful Occupation, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Spoliation Eviction Urgent Interdict Unlawful Occupation Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D Seale

Applicant

J Mothapi

Applicant

J Moloya

Applicant

E Monageng

Applicant

C Boshomane

Applicant

G T Sephurane

Applicant

L N & 441 Others

Applicant

A G Kruger N.O.

Respondent

P B Kruger N.O.

Respondent

Tambura 69 Trust

Respondent

National Commissioner of Police

Respondent

The Station Commander, Silverton SAPS

Respondent

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

The Sheriff

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were unlawfully dispossessed of their dwellings by the respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the eviction of the applicants complied with the relevant regulations and statutory requirements.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to restoration of possession and an order prohibiting demolition of their structures.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants were not spoliated but evicted in terms of an existing and valid court order granted on 24 March 2017, which interdicted unlawful occupation and authorised the Sheriff to evict trespassers. The applicants' occupation of the property was recent and lacked the permanence required to qualify as a 'home' under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act. The eviction was carried out in accordance with the court order and the applicants failed to provide sufficient particulars regarding their alleged vulnerability. The court was not convinced that an order for suspension of the eviction should be granted, and accordingly...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.