Phetla and Others v Tendaupenyu NO and Others (A582/2016)
Phetla and Others v Tendaupenyu NO and Others (A582/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 219 (26 April 2017)
The appeal succeeded because the court a quo erred in refusing to accept the appellants' answering affidavits and failed to consider the jurisdictional challenge and the requirements of a just and equitable eviction under PIE. The prior order did not bar the appellants in perpetuity from filing their affidavits, and the court retained discretion to condone late filing in the interests of justice. The court a quo's approach was procedurally and substantively flawed, as it ignored the appellants' representation and the constitutional implications of eviction. The punitive costs order was unjust…
Source excerpt
- Prevention Of Unlawful Eviction Act
- Jurisdiction Of Land Claims Court
- Just And Equitable Eviction
- Condonation For Late Filing
- Punitive Costs
- Constitutional Rights In Eviction