South Africa Case Law

Acire Property Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Banzi Trade 31 (Pty) Ltd t/a Brick-It (7889/2021)

Acire Property Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Banzi Trade 31 (Pty) Ltd t/a Brick-It (7889/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 542 (25 August 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7889/2021

Judge

Sawma

The court dismissed an eviction application, finding the notice to terminate a month-to-month lease was immediate and not a clear, effective termination on reasonable notice.

• Month To Month Lease
• Termination Of Lease
• Reasonable Notice
• Eviction Proceedings
• Month-to-month-lease
• Termination-of-lease

Quintas Properties (Pty) Ltd v Lusitania Food Products (Pty) Ltd (1140/2013)

Quintas Properties (Pty) Ltd v Lusitania Food Products (Pty) Ltd (1140/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 20 (4 June 2014)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

1140/2013

Judge

Lopes

The court found that, although the main lease and sub-lease terminated automatically on 31 January 2013, the conduct of the parties after that date—specifically, the respondent's continued occupation and payment of the exact rental amount proposed, and the applicant's acceptance of those payments without objection—gave rise to a tacit relocation of the lease. This amounted to the conclusion of a new month-to-month lease agreement between the parties. The absence of correspondence disputing the respondent's occupation or the basis for rental payments further supported the inference that both p…

Source excerpt

• Sub Lease Termination
• Tacit Relocation
• Eviction
• Month To Month Lease

Ellmore Court (Pty) Ltd v Ngwenya (38097/2012)

Ellmore Court (Pty) Ltd v Ngwenya (38097/2012) [2013] ZAGPJHC 61 (9 April 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

38097/2012

Judge

N F Kgomo

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the property and that the respondent's lease had expired and was properly cancelled due to non-payment and persistent refusal to comply with management instructions. The respondent and those occupying through her have no valid lease or right to remain in occupation. The respondent's arguments regarding indigence and the necessity of joining the municipality were unsupported by primary facts and did not trigger constitutional obligations for emergency accommodation. The respondent's conduct, including withholding payment and failing…

Source excerpt

• Eviction Under Pie Act
• Joinder Of Municipality
• Month To Month Lease
• Arrear Rent
• Attorney And Client Costs