This judgment is issued by the Judge whose name is reflected herein
and is submitted electronically to the parties/their legal
representatives by email. The judgment is further uploaded to the
electronic file of this matter on CaseLines by the Judge or her
Secretary. The date of this ju dgment is deemed to be 17 February
2025.
JUDGMENT
COLLIS J
INTRODUCTION:
1.The applicant before Court has applied for leave to appeal the
judgment of this Court handed down on 11 April 2024.
2. In anticipation of this application this Court requested the parties to
file short heads of arguments. Only the Applicant proceeded to file same
and the Respondent filed a Notice to Abide the decision of this Court.
3. The proceedings were concerned wi th the interpretation of section
118(1) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000
(“the Act”). Specifically, whether interest is chargeable for purposes of
issuing the certificate contemplated in section 118 (1) (“clearance
certificate”).
4. In the event of a finding that interest was indeed chargeable, there
were further incidental issues raised by the Respondent regarding the
type of interest chargeable by the municipality including the argument
on levying of compound interest.
5. The judgment handed down by the Court has the effect that a
certificate contemplated in section 118(1) of the Local Government
System Act, 32 of 2000 (“the Act”) must be issued once all amounts
due in connection with the property, as annunciate in section 118(1)(b)
of the Act, have been paid, notwithstanding that interest on any such
amounts has not been paid.
6. Differently put, th is Court declared that on interpretation of section
118(1)(b), the Municipality is prohibited from charging interest on any
arrear Municipal account prior to issuing the section 118(1)(b)
certifica te.
7. The declaration so made by this Court has an effect to future section
118 (1) certificate (“clearance certificates”), in that it impedes on
municipalities powers to embargo transfer of a property and to collect
outstanding arrear municipal debts, i ncluding interest, due in
connection with the property during the preceding two (2) years of
application for the clearance certificate.
8. The Applicant has raised several grounds of appeal.
9. The Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013, and more particularly Section
17(1) thereof, provides:
Leave to appeal may only be given where the judge or judges
concerned are of the opinion that - (i) the appeal would have a
reasonable prospect of success; or (ii) there is some other
compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including
conflicting judgments on the matter under consideration.
10. The present application for leave to appeal is mounted on the basis
that there exist reasonable prospects of success on appeal and because
there is some other compelling rea son why the appeal should be heard.
11. The legislated injunction that should guide the evaluation of this
application for leave to appeal is accordingly that; leave to appeal
should be granted if the Court is of the opinion that the appeal would
have a reasonable prospect of success or a compelling reason exists
why the appeal should be heard.
Instructing Attorney: MACHOBANE KRIEL Inc.
Date of Hearing: 29 November 2024
Date of Judgment: 17 February 2025