Van Rooyen v Factologix (Pty) Ltd and Others (16559/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 980 (3 October 2024)

Van Rooyen v Factologix (Pty) Ltd and Others (16559/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 980 (3 October 2024)

The applicant is the registered owner of the property and has complied with all procedural requirements under PIE. The lease agreement expired and continued month-to-month until validly terminated by written notice, which was reasonable and in accordance with the Rental Housing Act. The respondents have failed to raise any valid legal defence; their points in limine are either remedied, lack substance, or are unsupported by evidence. There is no indication that the respondents are vulnerable or will be rendered homeless, nor have they provided sufficient information regarding their personal circumstances. The court finds that it is just and equitable to grant the eviction order. Costs are...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 980
Parties
Applicant: Jeanette Johanna Van Rooyen; Respondent: Factologix (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: William Cornelius Dixon; Respondent: Hanlie Dixon; Respondent: All Other Unlawful Occupiers; Respondent: City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 October 2024
Case Number
16559/2022
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Eviction order granted; respondents to vacate property by 31 October 2024, failing which the Sheriff is authorised to evict on 15 November 2024. Costs awarded against respondents on attorney and client scale.
Judges
A.K. Ramlal
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Lease Termination, Unlawful Occupation, Just and Equitable Eviction, Costs Award
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Lease Termination Unlawful Occupation Just and Equitable Eviction 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jeanette Johanna Van Rooyen

Applicant

Factologix (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

William Cornelius Dixon

Respondent

Hanlie Dixon

Respondent

All Other Unlawful Occupiers

Respondent

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an eviction order under the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents have raised any valid legal defence to resist eviction.
  3. 3 Whether the procedural requirements of PIE and the Rules have been complied with.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is the registered owner of the property and has complied with all procedural requirements under PIE. The lease agreement expired and continued month-to-month until validly terminated by written notice, which was reasonable and in accordance with the Rental Housing Act. The respondents have failed to raise any valid legal defence; their points in limine are either remedied, lack substance, or are unsupported by evidence. There is no indication that the respondents are vulnerable or will be rendered homeless, nor have they provided sufficient information regarding their personal circumstances. The court finds that it is just and equitable to grant the eviction order. Costs are...

Court Disposition

Eviction order granted; respondents to vacate property by 31 October 2024, failing which the Sheriff is authorised to evict on 15 November 2024. Costs awarded against respondents on attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The First, Second, Third and Fourth Respondents' application in terms of Rule 6(5)(e) is granted.
  • The First, Second, Third and Fourth Respondents are evicted from the property situated at Erf 1[...] Z[...] Ext 4 known as No 5[...] S[...] P[...] Crescent, Zwartkop, Centurion.