Wibbelink and Another v The Unkown Individuals entering and/or Trespassing and/or Settling and/or Building on the Immovable Property Known as Portion [....] of ERF [....] Jan Niemand Park and Others (64145/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 642 (31 August 2022)

Wibbelink and Another v The Unkown Individuals entering and/or Trespassing and/or Settling and/or Building on the Immovable Property Known as Portion [....] of ERF [....] Jan Niemand Park and Others (64145/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 642 (31 August 2022)

The court found that the third respondent had not provided a substantive or satisfactory explanation for the postponement, having known of the hearing date since May 2022 and failing to secure senior counsel. The application for postponement was made orally and not in proper form. The interests of justice and the public require finalisation of the matter, and the applicants' right to a speedy resolution outweighs the respondent's request for postponement. The court exercised its discretion to refuse the postponement and directed that the rule nisi stand, with the parties to approach the office of the DJP for a preferential date for the matter to be ventilated and costs reserved.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 642
Parties
Applicant: Gert Wibbelink; Applicant: Machiel Berning; Respondent: The Unknown Individuals entering and/or trespassing and/or settling and/or building on the Immovable Property Known as Portion [....] of ERF [....] Jan Niemand Park; Respondent: City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Sam Netsianda
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 August 2022
Case Number
64145/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Postponement of Opposed Motion; Confirmation of Rule Nisi
Outcome
Application for postponement refused; rule nisi extended to stand; parties directed to approach the office of the DJP for a preferential date; costs reserved.
Judges
Ndlokovane
Legal Topics
Postponement, Rule Nisi, Urgent Interdict, Trespass, Joinder of Parties
Civil Procedure Land and Property Postponement Rule Nisi Urgent Interdict Trespass Joinder of Parties

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gert Wibbelink

Applicant

Machiel Berning

Applicant

The Unknown Individuals entering and/or trespassing and/or settling and/or building on the Immovable Property Known as Portion [....] of ERF [....] Jan Niemand Park

Respondent

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Sam Netsianda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Postponement of Opposed Motion; Confirmation of Rule Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third respondent has shown good cause for the postponement of the hearing.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require the postponement or finalisation of the matter.
  3. 3 Whether the rule nisi should be confirmed or further extended.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the third respondent had not provided a substantive or satisfactory explanation for the postponement, having known of the hearing date since May 2022 and failing to secure senior counsel. The application for postponement was made orally and not in proper form. The interests of justice and the public require finalisation of the matter, and the applicants' right to a speedy resolution outweighs the respondent's request for postponement. The court exercised its discretion to refuse the postponement and directed that the rule nisi stand, with the parties to approach the office of the DJP for a preferential date for the matter to be ventilated and costs reserved.

Court Disposition

Application for postponement refused; rule nisi extended to stand; parties directed to approach the office of the DJP for a preferential date; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The rule nisi extended to shall stand.
  • The parties are directed to approach the office of the DJP for a preferential date to ventilate the matter.