Uncedo Services Taxi Association and Others v East London Transitional Local Council (335/99) [2000] ZAECHC 16 (16 July 2000)

Uncedo Services Taxi Association and Others v East London Transitional Local Council (335/99) [2000] ZAECHC 16 (16 July 2000)

The court found that the so-called answering affidavit was considered in the main application and that the respondents' contentions were duly weighed. The disputes of fact raised by the respondents were not real, genuine, or bona fide, but rather peripheral and unsupported by the evidence. The respondents admitted membership in the first respondent and were bound by its decisions, including the agreement to vacate the land. The undertaking to vacate was not conditional in law, and subsequent violence at the alternative taxi rank did not revive any right to occupy the original land. The court concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different...

Citation
[2000] ZAECHC 16
Parties
Applicant: Uncedo Service Taxi Association and Others; Respondent: East London Transitional Local Council
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 July 2000
Case Number
335/99
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Judges
Ebrahim
Legal Topics
Dispute of Fact, Leave to Appeal, Eviction, Affidavit Evidence
Land and Property Civil Procedure Dispute of Fact Leave to Appeal Eviction Affidavit Evidence

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uncedo Service Taxi Association and Others

Applicant

East London Transitional Local Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the so-called answering affidavit by the respondents should have been considered as an answering affidavit to the founding affidavit.
  2. 2 Whether the disputes of fact raised by the respondents were real, genuine, or bona fide and required referral to oral evidence or trial.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents had a legal right to remain on the land after the first respondent vacated and undertook to relocate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the so-called answering affidavit was considered in the main application and that the respondents' contentions were duly weighed. The disputes of fact raised by the respondents were not real, genuine, or bona fide, but rather peripheral and unsupported by the evidence. The respondents admitted membership in the first respondent and were bound by its decisions, including the agreement to vacate the land. The undertaking to vacate was not conditional in law, and subsequent violence at the alternative taxi rank did not revive any right to occupy the original land. The court concluded that there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • Costs are awarded in favour of the applicant in the main trial, being the respondent in the application for leave to appeal.