Vox Terra (Pty) Ltd v Legemaat and Others (40056/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 231 (26 March 2021)

Vox Terra (Pty) Ltd v Legemaat and Others (40056/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 231 (26 March 2021)

The applicant, as owner of the immovable properties, did not conclude any lease agreement with the respondents or the legal entities managed by them, other than with Legemaat Snr. The lease agreement expressly prohibited subleasing or ceding rights to third parties. The respondents' occupation and farming activities on the properties were therefore unlawful. The applicant established a clear right to the relief sought. The non-joinder of Legemaat Snr did not render the proceedings defective, as the dispute was between the applicant and the respondents regarding unlawful occupation and use. The applicant is entitled to an interdict restraining the respondents from conducting farming...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 231
Parties
Applicant: Vox Terra (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Dirk Jacob Legemaat; Respondent: Cornelius Legemaat; Respondent: Johannes Legemaat
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 March 2021
Case Number
40056/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination of Urgent Application for Interdict
Outcome
Interdict granted restraining respondents from conducting farming activities on the applicant's properties; costs awarded as specified.
Judges
E van Der Schyff
Legal Topics
Interdict, Lease Agreement, Non Joinder, Sublease Prohibition, Costs Award
Land and Property Civil Procedure Interdict Lease Agreement Non Joinder Sublease Prohibition 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vox Terra (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Dirk Jacob Legemaat

Respondent

Cornelius Legemaat

Respondent

Johannes Legemaat

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination of Urgent Application for Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents have any legal right to conduct farming activities on the applicant's immovable properties.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interdict restraining the respondents from farming on the properties.
  3. 3 Whether non-joinder of Legemaat Snr renders the proceedings defective.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant, as owner of the immovable properties, did not conclude any lease agreement with the respondents or the legal entities managed by them, other than with Legemaat Snr. The lease agreement expressly prohibited subleasing or ceding rights to third parties. The respondents' occupation and farming activities on the properties were therefore unlawful. The applicant established a clear right to the relief sought. The non-joinder of Legemaat Snr did not render the proceedings defective, as the dispute was between the applicant and the respondents regarding unlawful occupation and use. The applicant is entitled to an interdict restraining the respondents from conducting farming...

Court Disposition

Interdict granted restraining respondents from conducting farming activities on the applicant's properties; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

  • The respondents and/or any other person/entity through the respondents are interdicted from conducting any farming activities (including specifically a dairy) on the identified immovable properties.
  • The first to third respondents, jointly and severally, one paying the others to be absolved, are to pay the costs of the application incurred until 23 November 2020.