Stockstories 15 BK en Ander v Erf 2292, Highveld x 12 Beleggings BK (12557/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 143 (1 August 2012)

Stockstories 15 BK en Ander v Erf 2292, Highveld x 12 Beleggings BK (12557/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 143 (1 August 2012)

The court found that the applicants' notice of application for leave to appeal did not comply with Rule 49(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court, as it failed to provide clear and specific reasons for each ground of appeal. The court held that the notice was a nullity and, even if it were valid, there were no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the eviction order or the interpretation of the lease agreement. The application was viewed as a transparent attempt to delay eviction, especially as the applicants had occupied the premises for over eleven months without paying rent. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with...

Citation
[2012] ZAGPPHC 143
Parties
Applicant: Stockstories 15 BK; Applicant: Arno Paul Brandt; Respondent: Erf 2292, Highveld x 12 Beleggings BK
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2012
Case Number
12557/2012
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
P C van der Byl
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal Requirements, Eviction Order, Contractual Interpretation
Civil Procedure Land and Property Leave to Appeal Requirements Eviction Order Contractual Interpretation

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

Parties

Stockstories 15 BK

Applicant

Arno Paul Brandt

Applicant

Erf 2292, Highveld x 12 Beleggings BK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Eviction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice of application for leave to appeal complies with Rule 49(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding the eviction order and interpretation of the lease agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the grounds for appeal are adequately and specifically set out.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' notice of application for leave to appeal did not comply with Rule 49(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court, as it failed to provide clear and specific reasons for each ground of appeal. The court held that the notice was a nullity and, even if it were valid, there were no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the eviction order or the interpretation of the lease agreement. The application was viewed as a transparent attempt to delay eviction, especially as the applicants had occupied the premises for over eleven months without paying rent. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.