Tapala and Another v Tlebetla and Others (89400/16) [2019] ZAGPPHC 46 (22 February 2019)

Tapala and Another v Tlebetla and Others (89400/16) [2019] ZAGPPHC 46 (22 February 2019)

The court found that both the sale to the first respondent and the sale to the first applicant were in contravention of section 10A(1) of the Housing Act, as neither transaction involved the requisite offer to the provincial housing department nor its consent. The deceased, as the initial owner, was expressly prohibited from alienating the property within eight years of transfer. The registration of the property in the name of the first respondent was therefore unlawful. The court held that the transfer and registration should be set aside, and directed the relevant authorities to provide a comprehensive report on the sale of state-subsidised properties and the effect of non-compliance...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 46
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Tapala; Applicant: Johanna Tapala; Respondent: Lesiba Jonny Tlebetla; Respondent: The Master of the High Court; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds; Respondent: The City of Johannesburg Municipality; Respondent: The Director General, Human Settlements
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 February 2019
Case Number
89400/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; transfer and registration in favour of the first respondent set aside.
Legal Topics
State Subsidised Housing, Housing Act Section 10a, Unlawful Transfer, Title Deed Cancellation
Land and Property Administrative Law State Subsidised Housing Housing Act Section 10a Unlawful Transfer Title Deed Cancellation

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Tapala

Applicant

Johanna Tapala

Applicant

Lesiba Jonny Tlebetla

Respondent

The Master of the High Court

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

The City of Johannesburg Municipality

Respondent

The Director General, Human Settlements

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sale and registration of the property to the first respondent was unlawful due to non-compliance with section 10A(1) of the Housing Act.
  2. 2 Whether the deceased had authority to sell the property to the first respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the transfer and registration in favour of the first respondent should be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the sale to the first respondent and the sale to the first applicant were in contravention of section 10A(1) of the Housing Act, as neither transaction involved the requisite offer to the provincial housing department nor its consent. The deceased, as the initial owner, was expressly prohibited from alienating the property within eight years of transfer. The registration of the property in the name of the first respondent was therefore unlawful. The court held that the transfer and registration should be set aside, and directed the relevant authorities to provide a comprehensive report on the sale of state-subsidised properties and the effect of non-compliance...

Court Disposition

Application granted; transfer and registration in favour of the first respondent set aside.

Orders

  • The sale and registration of the property in the name of the first respondent is declared unlawful and set aside.
  • The first applicant is declared the beneficiary of the property.