Van Jaarsveld and Others v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (1735/2021) [2024] ZANCHC 96 (31 May 2024)

Van Jaarsveld and Others v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (1735/2021) [2024] ZANCHC 96 (31 May 2024)

The court found that the applicants did not dispute the validity of the mortgage bond in their answering affidavit and took no issue with the notation in the bond that the conveyancer was duly authorized by a power of attorney granted by the trustees. The attempt to create doubt regarding the validity of the mortgage bond was deemed spurious and without merit, with no prospect of success on appeal. Regarding costs, the delay in finalizing the application was not solely attributable to the applicants, and the matter was not sufficiently complex or high-value to warrant costs on the attorney and client scale or Scale C. Costs were therefore awarded on Scale B.

Citation
[2024] ZANCHC 96
Parties
Applicant: Albertus Stephanus van Jaarsveld; Applicant: Elizabeth Katrina van Jaarsveld N.O.; Applicant: Hendrik Hermanus Jacobus van Jaarsveld N.O.; Applicant: Albertus Stephanus van Jaarsveld N.O.; Respondent: The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 May 2024
Case Number
1735/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Part of Judgment and Orders Made on 1 September 2023
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on Scale B.
Judges
Williams
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Special Executability, Mortgage Bond Validity, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Land and Property Leave to Appeal Special Executability Mortgage Bond Validity Costs Award

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albertus Stephanus van Jaarsveld

Applicant

Elizabeth Katrina van Jaarsveld N.O.

Applicant

Hendrik Hermanus Jacobus van Jaarsveld N.O.

Applicant

Albertus Stephanus van Jaarsveld N.O.

Applicant

The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Part of Judgment and Orders Made on 1 September 2023

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to attach the power of attorney for the conveyancer creates doubt about the trustees' authorization of the mortgage bond registration.
  2. 2 Whether the immovable properties of the trust were properly declared specially executable.
  3. 3 On what scale costs should be awarded for the application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants did not dispute the validity of the mortgage bond in their answering affidavit and took no issue with the notation in the bond that the conveyancer was duly authorized by a power of attorney granted by the trustees. The attempt to create doubt regarding the validity of the mortgage bond was deemed spurious and without merit, with no prospect of success on appeal. Regarding costs, the delay in finalizing the application was not solely attributable to the applicants, and the matter was not sufficiently complex or high-value to warrant costs on the attorney and client scale or Scale C. Costs were therefore awarded on Scale B.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on Scale B.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • Costs are awarded against the applicants on Scale B.