Tarica and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (2023/044543) [2025] ZAGPJHC 46 (27 January 2025)

Tarica and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (2023/044543) [2025] ZAGPJHC 46 (27 January 2025)

The court found that the applicants had raised a valid and ongoing dispute regarding the accuracy of the municipal account, satisfying all statutory requirements under section 102(2) of the Municipal Systems Act. The respondent failed to discharge its burden of proving the correctness of the charges, particularly those based on faulty or removed meters and implausible consumption figures. The respondent's argument that its internal policy could suspend the operation of prescription was rejected; the Prescription Act applies independently of municipal administrative practices. Charges older than three years, for which no legal proceedings were instituted and no acknowledgment of debt was...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 46
Parties
Applicant: Anthea Verity Tarica; Applicant: Katherine Anne Gascoigne N.O.; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 January 2025
Case Number
2023/044543
Procedural Posture
Opposed Motion / Final Determination of Main Application and Counterapplication
Outcome
Application granted in part; respondent ordered to open a new account in the first applicant's name, transfer charges, and write off prescribed amounts. Counterapplication dismissed as redundant.
Judges
Mahon
Legal Topics
Municipal Services Billing, Prescription Act Application, Consumer Rights, Municipal Account Disputes

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthea Verity Tarica

Applicant

Katherine Anne Gascoigne N.O.

Applicant

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Opposed Motion / Final Determination of Main Application and Counterapplication

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is obliged to open a municipal account in the first applicant's name and transfer charges from the deceased's account.
  2. 2 Whether certain charges on the municipal account have prescribed and are unenforceable under the Prescription Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's billing practices and disconnection of services were lawful and procedurally compliant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had raised a valid and ongoing dispute regarding the accuracy of the municipal account, satisfying all statutory requirements under section 102(2) of the Municipal Systems Act. The respondent failed to discharge its burden of proving the correctness of the charges, particularly those based on faulty or removed meters and implausible consumption figures. The respondent's argument that its internal policy could suspend the operation of prescription was rejected; the Prescription Act applies independently of municipal administrative practices. Charges older than three years, for which no legal proceedings were instituted and no acknowledgment of debt was...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; respondent ordered to open a new account in the first applicant's name, transfer charges, and write off prescribed amounts. Counterapplication dismissed as redundant.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to open a municipal account in the name of the first applicant and transfer all charges from 5 May 2021 to date from the deceased's account to the new account.
  • The respondent is ordered to write off all prescribed amounts (charges older than three years as at the date of the notice of motion, which are disputed, unpaid, not summonsed, and not acknowledged) on municipal account number 402834221.