About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2024
>>
[2024] ZAGPPHC 63
|
|
Body Corporate Salvokop v Ziramba (2022-056746) [2024] ZAGPPHC 63 (30 January 2024)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO: 2022-056746
1.
REPORTABLE: NO
2.
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
3.
REVISED: NO
DATE:
2024-01-30
In
the matter between:
THE
BODY CORPORATE SALVOKOP
Applicant
and
DOUGLAS
ZIRAMBA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
K
STRYDOM, AJ
1)
This
matter was set down on the unopposed motion roll off the 12th of
December 2023, being the return date of a rule nisi granted
in terms
of which the respondent was provisionally sequestrated.
2)
On
that day I ordered that the rule nisi be discharged and set aside the
provisional sequestration order.
3)
The
applicants filed a request for reasons for this judgment on the 14th
of December 2023, however, for some unbeknownst reason,
the request
only came to my attention on the 9
th
of January 2023.
4)
The
application for final sequestration was premised on the basis of a
court order obtained in the Magistrates Court against the
respondent
for payment of arrear levies and a subsequent
nulla
bona
return received from the Sherriff pursuant to the court order.
5)
At
the hearing I had expressed my reticence in making such a final order
not only in view of the low amount to the Magistrates Court
order
(approximately R13,000), but also given the clearly erroneous
assertion on the return that the respondent has no immovable
property. Given that the applicant is the body corporate for a
property owned by the respondent and that the court order was based
on levies due for an immovable property so owned by the respondent,
the statement is factually (and within the knowledge) incorrect.
I
also queried why attachment of the respondents' immovable property
and its sale instead of the present proceedings were not instituted
and was informed that the applicants elected to follow the
sequestration route.
6)
Whilst
acknowledging that the applicants are entitled to their election, I
noted that the Court still retains a discretion in ordering
a final
sequestration.
7)
I
pertinently drew counsel’s attention to the findings and
reasoning of Van der Schyff J in
Waterkloof
Boulevard Homeowners Association (Association Incorporated under
Section 21) v Yusuf and Another
(028945/2022) [2023]
ZAGPPHC 737 (28 August 2023) and indicated that, in reaching my
decision, I applied that reasoning (and finding)
to the present
matter.
8)
My reasons for the
order made is thus as per the judgment of Van der Schyff, which are
directly incorporated herein.
K
STRYDOM
ACTING
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
OF
SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG
DIVISION,
PRETORIA
Date
of hearing: 12 December 2023
Reasons
delivered: 30 January 2024
Appearances:
For
the Applicant:
Adv.
F.C. Lamprecht
Instructed
by:
EY
Stuart Incorporated
For
the Respondent:
In
person