Van Den Berg v Skosana (LCC10R/03) [2003] ZALCC 7 (18 February 2003)

Van Den Berg v Skosana (LCC10R/03) [2003] ZALCC 7 (18 February 2003)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the statutory requirements for eviction under ESTA. The notice served on the defendant did not comply with the prescribed form or language requirements, and the alleged transgressions were vague and unsubstantiated. The right of residence was not shown to have been lawfully terminated in a just and equitable manner, and the mandatory considerations under section 11(3) were not addressed. Critically, no probation officer's report was obtained as required by section 9(3) of ESTA. These procedural and substantive defects rendered the magistrate's eviction order invalid, and the court set it aside in its...

Citation
[2003] ZALCC 7
Parties
Plaintiff: I J DU P Van Den Berg; Defendant: Mmamorena Martha Skosana
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 February 2003
Case Number
LCC 10R/03
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Automatic Review From Magistrate's Court Under ESTA
Outcome
Magistrate's eviction order set aside in its entirety.
Judges
A Gildenhuys
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Eviction Procedure, Default Judgment, Suitable Alternative Accommodation
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Eviction Procedure Default Judgment Suitable Alternative Accommodation

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

I J DU P Van Den Berg

Plaintiff

Mmamorena Martha Skosana

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Automatic Review From Magistrate's Court Under ESTA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirements for an eviction order under section 9(2) of ESTA were satisfied.
  2. 2 Whether the right of residence was lawfully terminated in a just and equitable manner.
  3. 3 Whether proper notice of intention to obtain an eviction order was given in compliance with ESTA and its regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the statutory requirements for eviction under ESTA. The notice served on the defendant did not comply with the prescribed form or language requirements, and the alleged transgressions were vague and unsubstantiated. The right of residence was not shown to have been lawfully terminated in a just and equitable manner, and the mandatory considerations under section 11(3) were not addressed. Critically, no probation officer's report was obtained as required by section 9(3) of ESTA. These procedural and substantive defects rendered the magistrate's eviction order invalid, and the court set it aside in its...

Court Disposition

Magistrate's eviction order set aside in its entirety.

Orders

  • The Magistrate's order for eviction is set aside in full.