Young Ming Shan CC v Chagan NO and Others (26148/2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 25; 2015 (3) SA 227 (GJ); [2015] 2 All SA 362 (GJ) (2 February 2015)

Young Ming Shan CC v Chagan NO and Others (26148/2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 25; 2015 (3) SA 227 (GJ); [2015] 2 All SA 362 (GJ) (2 February 2015)

The court held that the Gauteng Housing Rental Tribunal's functions are administrative in nature and subject to review under PAJA. The Tribunal correctly found that the applicant's levying of a separate electricity service charge on tenants, in addition to rental and consumption charges, contravened Regulation 13 of the Gauteng Unfair Practice Regulations. The Regulations apply to all charges related to electricity services, not just consumption, and prohibit landlords from recovering more than the actual costs charged by the utility provider. The applicant's reliance on bylaws and NERSA's concept paper was misplaced, as these did not override the specific regulatory framework governing...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 25
Parties
Applicant: Young Ming Shan CC; Respondent: Ajay Chagan NO; Respondent: Fikile Vusi Jele and 80 Others
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 February 2015
Case Number
26148/2013
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review and Set Aside Tribunal Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Coppin
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Rental Housing Act, Unfair Practice Regulations, Electricity Service Charges, Judicial Review, Locus Standi
Administrative Law Land and Property Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Rental Housing Act Unfair Practice Regulations Electricity Service Charges Judicial Review +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Young Ming Shan CC

Applicant

Ajay Chagan NO

Respondent

Fikile Vusi Jele and 80 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Application to Review and Set Aside Tribunal Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Gauteng Housing Rental Tribunal's ruling declaring the applicant's electricity service charge an unfair practice was lawful and reviewable under PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to apply the Gauteng Unfair Practices Regulations to the service charge levied by the applicant.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was legally entitled to levy a separate electricity service charge on tenants in addition to rental and consumption charges.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Gauteng Housing Rental Tribunal's functions are administrative in nature and subject to review under PAJA. The Tribunal correctly found that the applicant's levying of a separate electricity service charge on tenants, in addition to rental and consumption charges, contravened Regulation 13 of the Gauteng Unfair Practice Regulations. The Regulations apply to all charges related to electricity services, not just consumption, and prohibit landlords from recovering more than the actual costs charged by the utility provider. The applicant's reliance on bylaws and NERSA's concept paper was misplaced, as these did not override the specific regulatory framework governing...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the Tribunal's ruling is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.