Seebed CC t/a Siyabonga Convenience Centre v Engen Petroleum Limited (CCT 290/20) [2022] ZACC 28; 2023 (12) BCLR 1535 (CC) (20 July 2022)

Seebed CC t/a Siyabonga Convenience Centre v Engen Petroleum Limited (CCT 290/20) [2022] ZACC 28; 2023 (12) BCLR 1535 (CC) (20 July 2022)

The Constitutional Court held that its jurisdiction was engaged due to the alleged denial of access to courts, but found no basis to interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion in refusing the applicant's supplementary answering affidavit. The High Court correctly rejected the lis pendens defence because the issues in the first and second eviction proceedings were not the same, and the applicant had not properly pleaded its claims. The concession that the lease was on a month-to-month basis was a concession of fact, entitling the respondent to terminate on one month's notice. The applicant's claim to remain in occupation until July 2020 was not properly raised and, even if it...

Citation
[2022] ZACC 28
Parties
Applicant: Seebed CC t/a Siyabonga Convenience Centre; Respondent: Engen Petroleum Limited
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 July 2022
Case Number
CCT 290/20
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court After Dismissal by High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Madlanga, Majiedt, Mhlantla, Pillay, Rogers, Tlaletsi, Theron, Tshiqi
Legal Topics
Petroleum Products Act, Eviction Proceedings, Arbitration Stay, Contractual Termination, Lis Pendens, Unfair Contractual Practices
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Civil Procedure Petroleum Products Act Eviction Proceedings Arbitration Stay Contractual Termination Lis Pendens +1 more

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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seebed CC t/a Siyabonga Convenience Centre

Applicant

Engen Petroleum Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court After Dismissal by High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in granting an eviction order against the applicant while a related dispute was pending.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in refusing the applicant's supplementary answering affidavit.
  3. 3 Whether the lis pendens defence was applicable to stay the second eviction proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that its jurisdiction was engaged due to the alleged denial of access to courts, but found no basis to interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion in refusing the applicant's supplementary answering affidavit. The High Court correctly rejected the lis pendens defence because the issues in the first and second eviction proceedings were not the same, and the applicant had not properly pleaded its claims. The concession that the lease was on a month-to-month basis was a concession of fact, entitling the respondent to terminate on one month's notice. The applicant's claim to remain in occupation until July 2020 was not properly raised and, even if it...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • The applicant must pay the respondent’s costs in this Court.