Spar Group Limited v Capstone 359 (Pty) Limited and Others (41791 / 2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 83 (20 May 2015)

Spar Group Limited v Capstone 359 (Pty) Limited and Others (41791 / 2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 83 (20 May 2015)

The court found that the First Respondent's liability arises from the sub-lease and head-lease agreements, specifically Clauses 9.2 and 14.2, which obligate the First Respondent to pay any amount the Applicant is required to pay to Express Model, including increased property rates. The auditor's certificate serves...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 83
Parties
Applicant: The Spar Group Limited; Respondent: Capstone 359 (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Vassilios Loizou; Respondent: Apostolos Andrew Mina; Respondent: Sydney Donald Russell Searle
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Case Number
41791 / 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted in favour of the Applicant.
Judges
B A Mashile
Legal Topics
Suretyship, Lease Agreement, Property Rates, Contractual Liability
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Suretyship Lease Agreement Property Rates Contractual Liability

Source-derived case record

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

The Spar Group Limited

Applicant

Capstone 359 (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Vassilios Loizou

Respondent

Apostolos Andrew Mina

Respondent

Sydney Donald Russell Searle

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent is liable to pay the amount of R519 943.52 to the Applicant under the sub-lease agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the Second to Fourth Respondents are liable as sureties and co-principal debtors for the First Respondent's obligations.
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant must prove an actual increase in property rates to recover the claimed amount.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the First Respondent's liability arises from the sub-lease and head-lease agreements, specifically Clauses 9.2 and 14.2, which obligate the First Respondent to pay any amount the Applicant is required to pay to Express Model, including increased property rates. The auditor's certificate serves as conclusive proof of the amount owed, and the Applicant is not required to demonstrate an actual increase in rates beyond the certificate. The founding affidavit was deemed sufficient, and the sureties are jointly and severally liable. The Respondents' objections regarding hearsay and inadequacy of evidence were dismissed, as the certificate rendered further documentation...

Court Disposition

Application granted in favour of the Applicant.

Orders

  • The Respondents are to pay to the Applicant, jointly and severally the one paying the others to be absolved, the amount of R519 943.52.
  • Interest on the aforesaid sum of R519 943.52 at the rate of 9% per annum from date hereof to date of payment.