About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2026
>>
[2026] ZAGPJHC 59
|
|
Giant Signs (Pty) Ltd v City of Johannesburg and Another (084439/2024) [2026] ZAGPJHC 59 (21 January 2026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION,
JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO
: 084439/2024
DATE
:
21-01-2026
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES : NO
(3)
REVISED
SIGNATURE
DATE: 21 January 2026
In the matter between
GIANT SIGNS (PTY)
LTD
Applicant
and
CITY OF
JOHANNESBURG
First Respondent
HYDE PARK CORNER (PTY)
LTD
Second Respondent
JUDGMENT
EX TEMPORE
WILSON,
J
:
The
applicant seeks to compel the second respondent to comply with a
notice issued under rule 35 (12). The documents sought
consist
of an application and further supporting material made to the first
respondent to move a property line. The location of
the property line
is material to the issues in the main application.
The application to compel
was opposed by the second respondent on the basis that the decision
to move the property line was made
after the decision challenged in
the main application was made and also after the main application was
instituted.
I put to Mr Kruger, who
appeared for the second respondent, that even were that so, the fact
of the change of the location of the
property line and the material
on which the decision to change the location of the property line was
made might still be relevant
to any just and equitable relief that
might be granted if the decision challenged in the main application
is reviewed and set aside.
Mr Kruger could not
really gainsay that proposition and he made no submissions against
it. I think that was a wise decision.
It seems to me that the
material that the applicant seeks is entirely relevant at least to
the relief that might be ordered in
the main application.
For all of those reasons
there will be an order compelling compliance with the rule 35(12)
notice. Ms Kabelo, who appeared
for the applicant, rather
adventurously asked for costs on scale C. She will have costs
on scale A. A draft order has
been handed up to me which I have
amended. I shall endorse it on those terms. That order is signed and
dated marked “X”.
WILSON, J
JUDGE OF THE HIGH
COURT
21 January 2026