South Africa Case Law

Lismer Properties CC and Others v Bhorat and Others (8856/2021)

Lismer Properties CC and Others v Bhorat and Others (8856/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1215 (21 September 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

8856/2021

Judge

NV Khumalo

The court found that the applicants proved ownership of the property and that the respondents were in occupation. The respondents failed to establish a lawful entitlement to remain, as no valid oral or written lease agreement was concluded. The WhatsApp messages did not constitute a binding agreement, and the intended parties never signed any recorded terms. The trustees collectively decided not to enter into any lease with the respondents. The respondents have not paid rent, rates, or utilities, and their continued occupation prejudices the insolvent estate and its creditors. The respondents…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Occupation
• Eviction Under Pie Act
• Oral Lease Agreement
• Holding Over Damages

Liberty Group Limited and Another v A & O Imports and Exports (PTY) Ltd and Others (2021/4380)

Liberty Group Limited and Another v A & O Imports and Exports (PTY) Ltd and Others (2021/4380) [2022] ZAGPJHC 687 (14 September 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/4380

Judge

Strydom

The court found that the respondents failed to raise a bona fide defence to the summary judgment application. The denial of the validity of the written lease agreement was speculative, unsupported by evidence, and contradicted previous admissions. The alleged oral or tacit lease agreement was vague, lacked documentary support, and was legally unsustainable due to the non-variation clause. The suretyships executed by the second and third respondents were enforceable as the written lease agreement regulated the parties' relationship. The respondents were found liable for arrear rental and eject…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Lease Agreement
• Suretyship Enforcement
• Oral Variation
• Holding Over Damages

Extra Dimensions 44 (Pty) Ltd v Devcor Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (33476/2019)

Extra Dimensions 44 (Pty) Ltd v Devcor Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another (33476/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 813 (14 December 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

33476/2019

Judge

Nichols

The court held that the plaintiff, having entered into a re-cession agreement with Nedbank that re-vested its rights in respect of the lease agreement from a date prior to the institution of action, was retrospectively vested with locus standi. The court found that the defendants suffered no prejudice, and that practical justice and established legal principles justified allowing the plaintiff to proceed. The court rejected the defendants' argument that the re-cession was not outright due to clause 5, finding that the operative cession was contained in clause 2 and remained in force until one…

Source excerpt

• Locus Standi
• Cession In Securitatem Debiti
• Recession Of Claims
• Replication Vs Amendment
• Holding Over Damages

Liberty Group Limited v Plumifon (Pty) Ltd TA Sally Williams Ice Cream and Others (11560/2019)

Liberty Group Limited v Plumifon (Pty) Ltd TA Sally Williams Ice Cream and Others (11560/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 473 (23 July 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

11560/2019

Judge

M.M.D. LENYAI

The court found that the applicant properly withdrew its claim against the first respondent, curing any non-joinder issue. The second and third respondents, as sureties and co-principal debtors, remain liable for the damages arising from the holding over of the premises after lease cancellation. The High Court is the appropriate forum as the damages claim was postponed sine die in prior proceedings before this court, and all relevant pleadings and documents are before it. The respondents failed to raise a real, genuine or bona fide dispute of fact regarding the quantum of damages, having not…

Source excerpt

• Lease Cancellation
• Holding Over Damages
• Suretyship Liability
• Non Joinder
• Abuse Of Process
• Mitigation Of Damages

Matthews v Douglasdale Dairy (Pty) Ltd (31670/19)

Matthews v Douglasdale Dairy (Pty) Ltd (31670/19) [2021] ZAGPJHC 712 (25 February 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

31670/19

Judge

Cowen AJ

The court held that the plaintiff's pleadings, although framed as damages for 'holding over', disclose a valid cause of action in delict for patrimonial loss arising from the defendant's continued unlawful occupation of the property. The term 'holding over' is not confined to contractual claims and may encompass delictual claims for damages where a subsequent owner is deprived of use and enjoyment of property. The exception was dismissed as the pleadings, interpreted reasonably, support a claim under the actio legis Aquilia. Regarding joinder, the court found that the co-owner, Mr Rowan Matth…

Source excerpt

• Holding Over Damages
• Actio Legis Aquilia
• Joinder Of Co Owners
• Exception To Pleadings
• Unlawful Occupation
• Patrimonial Loss

Bray v Boshoff NO and Others, In Re: Boshoff NO and Others v Bray (2017/1627)

Bray v Boshoff NO and Others, In Re: Boshoff NO and Others v Bray (2017/1627) [2020] ZAGPJHC 211 (28 August 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2017/1627

Judge

T Siwendu

The court held that amendments to pleadings should generally be allowed unless they cause irremediable prejudice to the opposing party. The applicant's lack of locus standi at the time of litis contestatio could be cured by the subsequent re-cession of rights from Absa Bank, in line with the precedent set in Marigold Ice Cream Co (Pty) Ltd v National Co-operative Dairies Ltd. The court rejected the requirement for exceptional circumstances as set out in Philotex, favouring a flexible approach that prioritizes the existence of triable issues and the absence of mala fide conduct. However, the c…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Locus Standi
• Cession And Recession
• Prescription Of Claims
• Holding Over Damages

Sharma v Hirschowitz and Others (A3064/18)

Sharma v Hirschowitz and Others (A3064/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 434; 2020 (3) SA 285 (GJ) (4 November 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A3064/18

Judges

I Opperman, HE Mkhawane

The court held that the magistrate erred in awarding holding over damages at R40 000 per month, as the only reliable evidence of market rental at the relevant time was the R34 500 per month orally agreed and paid by the appellant. The oral agreement was valid and enforceable, as section 5(1) of the Rental Housing Act permits oral leases, and section 5(5) creates only a rebuttable presumption of continuation of prior terms in the absence of a written agreement. The common cause oral agreement rebutted the presumption. The rental deposit and accrued interest (R48 164) should have been set off a…

Source excerpt

• Rental Housing Act
• Holding Over Damages
• Oral Lease Agreement
• Set Off
• Evidentiary Presumptions

Genbiz Trading 1001 (Pty) Ltd trading as XEROX v Duplicate Properties (CA180/2017)

Genbiz Trading 1001 (Pty) Ltd trading as XEROX v Duplicate Properties (CA180/2017) [2018] ZAECGHC 106 (2 October 2018)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

CA180/2017

Judges

Bloem, Van Zyl

High Court appeal about a tenant’s duty to return leased premises in repair. The appeal failed because the tenant did not prove any later amendment or excuse for delay.

• Lease Agreement
• Holding Over Damages
• Contractual Amendment
• Repair Obligations
• Lease-agreement
• Holding-over-damages

Henman v Liberty Group Limited (AR425/15)

Henman v Liberty Group Limited (AR425/15) [2016] ZAKZPHC 55 (9 June 2016)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR425/15

Judges

Kruger, Koen

High Court appeal partly upheld on rescission and condonation. Rescission was granted for arrear rental claims, but refused for holding-over and eviction damages.

• Condonation For Late Filing
• Recission Of Judgment
• Suretyship Liability
• Arrear Rental
• Holding Over Damages
• Condonation

Diocese of Natal of the Anglican Church of South Africa v Primed Sub-Acute Medical CC and Others (4776/2013P)

Diocese of Natal of the Anglican Church of South Africa v Primed Sub-Acute Medical CC and Others (4776/2013P) [2016] ZAKZPHC 38 (28 April 2016)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

4776/2013P

Judge

Van Zyl

The High Court ordered eviction after finding a lease and settlement agreement were lawfully cancelled for breach, with sureties liable and holding-over damages recoverable.

• Eviction
• Lease Cancellation
• Suretyship Liability
• Holding Over Damages
• Settlement Agreement
• Enrichment Lien