Viviers NO and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (31753/2016) [2016] ZAGPJHC 277 (30 September 2016)

Viviers NO and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (31753/2016) [2016] ZAGPJHC 277 (30 September 2016)

The court found that the sixth respondent unlawfully and unilaterally interfered with the Board's statutory duties by locking the applicants out of their offices and threatening them with non-payment for their services. The Board is an autonomous statutory entity established under the Municipal Property Rates Act and must function independently. The City is obliged to provide the Board with necessary office accommodation and facilitate its activities. The respondents' conduct was unjustified and amounted to unlawful interference. The relief sought by the applicants was justified, and the court granted an interdict restraining the respondents from further interference. The court also found...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPJHC 277
Parties
Applicant: Anthonie Michael Viviers NO; Applicant: Valuation Appeal Board of the City of Johannesburg GV 2008; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Six Other Respondents
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 2016
Case Number
31753/2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interdict and Costs Order
Outcome
Application granted. Interdict issued against the first and sixth respondents. Costs awarded on a punitive scale against the City and partially against the sixth respondent.
Judges
FHD Van Oosten
Legal Topics
Municipal Property Rates Act, Statutory Board Autonomy, Interdictory Relief, Unlawful Interference
Administrative Law Land and Property Municipal Property Rates Act Statutory Board Autonomy Interdictory Relief Unlawful Interference

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

Anthonie Michael Viviers NO

Applicant

Valuation Appeal Board of the City of Johannesburg GV 2008

Applicant

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Six Other Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interdict and Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sixth respondent unlawfully interfered with the statutory duties of the Valuation Appeal Board.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to an interdict restraining the respondents from interfering with their activities under the Municipal Property Rates Act.
  3. 3 Whether a punitive costs order is justified against the City and the sixth respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the sixth respondent unlawfully and unilaterally interfered with the Board's statutory duties by locking the applicants out of their offices and threatening them with non-payment for their services. The Board is an autonomous statutory entity established under the Municipal Property Rates Act and must function independently. The City is obliged to provide the Board with necessary office accommodation and facilitate its activities. The respondents' conduct was unjustified and amounted to unlawful interference. The relief sought by the applicants was justified, and the court granted an interdict restraining the respondents from further interference. The court also found...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Interdict issued against the first and sixth respondents. Costs awarded on a punitive scale against the City and partially against the sixth respondent.

Orders

  • The first and sixth respondents are interdicted and restrained from interfering with, in any manner whatsoever, the activities, obligations and duties of the applicants as described in terms of the Municipal Property Rates Act 6 of 2004.
  • The first respondent shall pay the costs of this application on an attorney and client scale.