South Africa: Land Claims Court Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: Land Claims Court >> 2003 >> [2003] ZALCC 15

| Noteup | LawCite

De Wit v May (LCC45R/03) [2003] ZALCC 15 (12 June 2003)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format


IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA



RANDBURG CASE NUMBER: LCC 45R/03

In chambers: MEER J MAGISTRATE’S COURT CASE NUMBER: 114/02


Decided on: 12 June 2003


In the review proceedings in the case between:


DE WIT, AJ Applicant


and


MAY, S Respondent





JUDGMENT





MEER J:



  1. This is an automatic review under section 19(3) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act1 (“the Act”) of an order granted by the Magistrate, Joubertina on 20 May 2003, in terms of which an agreement between the parties providing for the respondent to vacate a dwelling on Portion 71 of the farm Misgund No 285, Uniondale, Western Cape, is made an order of court.


  1. I am unable to confirm the order for the following reasons.


  1. The agreement fails to comply with section 12(1)(b) of the act which prescribes for a date upon which an occupier can be moved by the sheriff if necessary in the event of the occupier not leaving the farm on the date specified.2


  1. Clause 2 of the agreement has a provision that the occupier will pay any costs if it is necessary to evict him. It is not the practice of this Court to prescribe for costs in cases of this nature, as has been explained in various decisions.3


  1. I therefore make the following order:


(1) The eviction order of the Magistrate: Joubertina, made on 20 May 2003, is set aside in whole.


(2) The applicant is given leave to renew its eviction application on the same papers, supplemented as needs be, on notice to the respondents.




_________________________

JUDGE Y S MEER



For the applicant:

CW Malan Joubertina Ing, Joubertina.


For the respondent:

Mosdella Pama & Cox, Knysna.


1 Act 62 of 1997, as amended.

2 See Ferguson v Buthelezi and Another [2001] 4 All SA 439 (LCC) at para [17]-[18].

3 See, for example, Serole and Another v Pienaar 2000 (1) SA 328 (LCC); [1999] 1 All SA 562 (LCC) at para [19]; Skhosana and Others v Roos T/A Roos se Oord 2000 (4) SA 561 (LCC); [1999] 2 All SA 652 (LCC) at para [30].