Firstrand Bank Limited v Van Niekerk and Others (51/2020) [2024] ZAECQBHC 46 (9 July 2024)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Case number
51/2020
Judge
Beshe
The High Court dismissed an application to declare the respondents’ home executable under Rule 46A, finding that execution would unfairly infringe their housing rights.
Vivian and Others v ABSA Bank Ltd and Another (20095/2017) [2024] ZAGPPHC 670 (2 July 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
20095/2017
Judge
Gwala
The court held that technical errors in the citation of procedural rules should not bar the applicants from joining the proceedings, as they have a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter and a bona fide defence. The applicants were not cited in the main action and were unaware of the litigation, which justifies rescission of the default judgment. The alleged fraudulent transfer of property, if proven, would mean ownership did not pass, and the applicants are entitled to defend their rights. The court emphasized the importance of access to justice and the need to prevent grave i…
Firstrand Bank Limited v Farisani [2023] ZAGPPHC 542; 57108/2019 (7 July 2023)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
57108/2019
Judge
HJ De Wet
The High Court postponed summary judgment and a Rule 46A execution application, finding the supporting affidavits and property valuation evidence were defective.
Custom Capital Cash Advances (Pty) Ltd v Mundell and Others (7567/2020P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 22 (3 March 2023)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
7567/2020P
Judge
P C Bezuidenhout
The High Court dismissed an application to declare a respondent’s primary residence executable, finding the property valuation was too old to justify sale under Rule 46A.
Nedbank Limited v Trustees for the time being of the Mthunzi Mdwaba Family Trust and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 93; A162/2021 (16 February 2023)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A162/2021
Judges
Phahlane, M Munzhelele, H Koovertje
The court held that Rule 46A applies to residential property registered in the name of a trust when it is occupied as a primary residence by trust beneficiaries. The Supreme Court of Appeal in Bestbier clarified that the protection of Rule 46A extends to such beneficiaries, and the court must conduct a proper inquiry into their circumstances, including indigence and vulnerability, before authorising execution. In this case, there was no evidence before the court regarding the respondents' indigence or whether they fall under the Jaftha requirements. Therefore, the matter must be remitted to t…
