DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Notices Wetlike Kennisgewings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legal Notices Wetlike Kennisgewings Vol. 649 Pretoria, 5 July 2019 Julie No. 42559 LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS SALES IN EXECUTION AND OTHER PUBLIC SALES GEREGTELIKE EN ANDER QPENBARE VERKOPE 2 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 3 CONTENTS / INHOUD LEGAL NOTICES / WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS SALES IN EXECUTION AND OTHER PUBLIC SALES GEREGTELIKE EN ANDER OPENBARE VERKOPE Sales in execution • Geregtelike verkope ....................................................................................................... 12 Gauteng ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Eastern Cape / Oos-Kaap ................................................................................................................ 50 Free State / Vrystaat ....................................................................................................................... 53 KwaZulu-Natal .............................................................................................................................. 61 Limpopo ...................................................................................................................................... 81 Mpumalanga ................................................................................................................................ 83 North West / Noordwes ................................................................................................................... 88 Northern Cape / Noord-Kaap ............................................................................................................ 93 Western Cape / Wes-Kaap ............................................................................................................... 94 Public auctions, sales and tenders Openbare veilings, verkope en tenders .......................................................................................................... 106 Gauteng ...................................................................................................................................... 106 KwaZulu-Natal .............................................................................................................................. 107 Limpopo ...................................................................................................................................... 108 4 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 5 6 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 7 8 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 9 10 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 11 12 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 SALES IN EXECUTION AND OTHER PUBLIC SALES GEREGTELIKE EN ANDER OPENBARE VERKOPE ESGV SALES IN EXECUTION • GEREGTELIKE VERKOPE GAUTENG Case No: 75948/2018 DOCEX 101, PRETORIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) In the matter between: THE STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED (REG NO. 62/000738/06) (EXECUTION CREDITOR) AND MEHMOOD SULTAN HAJI ABDUL KARIM (ID NO. 660501 5839 087) (FIRST JUDGMENT DEBTOR) AND MARIAM BIBI HAJI ABDUL KARIM (ID NO. 720909 0160 086) (SECOND JUDGMENT DEBTOR) NOTICE OF SALE IN EXECUTION: IMMOVABLE PROPERTY 15 July 2019, 11:00, SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT CENTURION WEST, at the Sheriff’s office at 229 Blackwood Street, Hennopspark, Centurion In pursuance of judgment granted against the First and Second Judgment Debtors on 14 March 2019 wherein the property described below was declared specially executable, in the above Honourable Court and under a writ of execution issued thereafter the immovable property belonging to the First and Second Judgment Debtors listed hereunder will be sold in execution on MONDAY, 15 JULY 2019 at 11h00 by the Sheriff of the High Court CENTURION WEST, at the Sheriff’s office at 229 Blackwood Street, Hennopspark, Centurion, to the highest bidder: Description: ERF 3573 ELDORAIGNE EXTENSION 35 TOWNSHIP, REGISTRATION DIVISION J.R., PROVINCE OF GAUTENG; In extent: 1 000 (ONE THOUSAND) SQUARE METRES; Physical Address: 45 BONDEV DRIVE, ELDOGLEN ESTATE, ELDORAIGNE, CENTURION; Zoned: SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL; HELD by the First and Second Judgment Debtors under Deed of Transfer No. T81129/2013. IMPROVEMENTS: The following information is given but not guaranteed: The improvements on the property consist of the following: House in Security Estate consisting of:- x3 Bedrooms; x2 Bathrooms; Living room; Dining room; Lounge; Kitchen; Pantry; Laundry; Garage; Plaster outer wall finishing, tiled roof finishing and tiles as inner floor finishing. The full conditions may be inspected at the office of the Sheriff of the High Court CENTURION WEST, during office hours, at 229 BLACKWOOD STREET, HENNOPSPARK, CENTURION. Note: Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008: Buyers/Bidders must register to bid and original proof of identity and residential address are required. Should you buy on behalf of someone else, or a legal entity, you will need to present the Sheriff with written authority to this effect. Further information and Regulations in terms of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 are available at the office of the Sheriff for inspection. Dated at PRETORIA 17 May 2019. Attorneys for Plaintiff(s): NEWTONS INC.. 2nd Floor, Lobby 3, Brooklyn Forum Building, 337 Veale Street, Nieuw Muckleneuk, Pretoria. Tel: (012) 425 0200. Fax: (012) 460 9491. Ref: I07703/Z Magagula/LH/lf. t STAATSKOERANT, 5 JULIE 2019 No. 42559 13 AUCTION Case No: 16396/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) In the matter between: FIRSTRAND BANK LIMITED, PLAINTIFF AND MARUPING PHINIASE TLODISANG (IDENTITY NUMBER: 7612075786082) FIRST DEFENDANT, JOYCE BOITUMELO TLODISANG (IDENTITY NUMBER: 8004040564084) SECOND DEFENDANT NOTICE OF SALE IN EXECUTION 19 July 2019, 10:00, C/O BRINK & KOCK STREET, @ OFFICE BUILDING VAN VELDEN-DUFFEY ATTORNEYS (67 BRINK STREET) RUSTENBURG In execution of a judgment of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria in the above mentioned suit, a sale with reserve price of R187 882.11 will be held by the Sheriff Rustenburg, c/o BRINK & KOCK STREET, @ OFFICE BUILDING VAN VELDEN - DUFFEY ATTORNEYS (67 BRINK STREET) RUSTENBURG on FRIDAY the 19th DAY OF JULY 2019 at 10H00 of the undermentioned property of the defendants’ subject to the conditions of sale which are available for inspection at the offices of the Sheriff Offices, RUSTENBURG during office hours. ERF 13856 BOITEKONG EXTENSION 15 TOWNSHIP, REGISTRATION DIVISION J.Q. PROVINCE OF NORTH-WEST, MEASURING 243 (TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY-THREE) SQUARE METRES, HELD BY DEED OF TRANSFER NUMBER T16421/2017, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, ALSO KNOWN AS: 13856 86th AVENUE, BOITEKONG EXT 15, RUSTENBURG; The following information is furnished regarding improvements on the property although nothing in this respect is guaranteed: 2 BEDROOMS, BATHROOM, OPEN PLAN KITCHEN. The property is zoned residential. The sale shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the High Court and the rules made thereunder and the Purchaser (other than the Execution Creditor) shall pay a deposit of 10% of the purchase price in cash at the time of the sale. The full Conditions of Sale and rules of auction shall be inspected at the offices of the Sheriff of the High Court, RUSTENBURG, OFFICE BUILDING, NORTH BLOCK, OFFICE NO. 4, 67 BRINK STREET, RUSTENBURG, 24 hours prior to the auction. Take further notice that:- 1.This sale is a sale in execution pursuant to a judgment obtained in the above court. 2.The Rules of this auction is available 24 hours before the auction at the office of the Sheriff Rustenburg. 3.Registration as a buyer is a pre-requisite subject to the conditions, inter alia: (a)Directive of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (URL http://www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction?id=99961). (b)FICA-legislation i.r.o. proof of identity and address particulars; (c)All bidders are required to pay R15 000.00 (refundable) registration fee prior to the commencement of the auction in order to obtain a buyer’s card; (d)Registration conditions Advertising costs at current publication rates and sale costs according to court rules, apply. The purchaser shall pay to the sheriff a deposit of 10 per cent of the purchase price in cash or by bank guaranteed cheque on the day of the sale. The balance shall be paid against transfer and shall be secured by a guarantee issued by a financial institution approved by the execution creditor or his or her attorney, and shall be furnished to the sheriff within…………………. days after the sale. The property may be taken possession of after signature of the conditions of sale, payment of the deposit and upon the balance of the purchase prince being secured in terms of secured in terms of clause 4 of the conditions of sale. Should the purchaser receive possession of the property, the purchaser shall be liable for occupational rental at the rate of 1% of the purchase price per month. Dated at PRETORIA 28 May 2019. Attorneys for Plaintiff(s): VEZI DE BEER ATTORNEYS. 319 ALPINE ROAD, LYNNWOOD, PRETORIA. Tel: 012 361 5640. Fax: 0866854170. Ref: M MOHAMED/MDP/MAT48309. t 14 No. 42559 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 5 JULY 2019 AUCTION Case No: 45197/18 DOCEX 5 BEDFORDVIEW IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION JOHANNESBURG) In the matter between: THE STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LTD PLAINTIFF AND PHANUEL MAPHOSA (PREVIOUSLY
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (Special Trip) XXXX WER Yes AANDRUS, Bloemfontein 9300
    Place Name Code Hub Surch Regional A KRIEK (special trip) XXXX WER Yes AANDRUS, Bloemfontein 9300 BFN No AANHOU WEN, Stellenbosch 7600 SSS No ABBOTSDALE 7600 SSS No ABBOTSFORD, East London 5241 ELS No ABBOTSFORD, Johannesburg 2192 JNB No ABBOTSPOORT 0608 PTR Yes ABERDEEN (48 hrs) 6270 PLR Yes ABORETUM 3900 RCB Town Ships No ACACIA PARK 7405 CPT No ACACIAVILLE 3370 LDY Town Ships No ACKERVILLE, Witbank 1035 WIR Town Ships Yes ACORNHOEK 1 3 5 1360 NLR Town Ships Yes ACTIVIA PARK, Elandsfontein 1406 JNB No ACTONVILLE & Ext 2 - Benoni 1501 JNB No ADAMAYVIEW, Klerksdorp 2571 RAN No ADAMS MISSION 4100 DUR No ADCOCK VALE Ext/Uit, Port Elizabeth 6045 PLZ No ADCOCK VALE, Port Elizabeth 6001 PLZ No ADDINGTON, Durban 4001 DUR No ADDNEY 0712 PTR Yes ADDO 2 5 6105 PLR Yes ADELAIDE ( Daily 48 Hrs ) 5760 PLR Yes ADENDORP 6282 PLR Yes AERORAND, Middelburg (Tvl) 1050 WIR Yes AEROTON, Johannesburg 2013 JNB No AFGHANI 2 4 XXXX BTL Town Ships Yes AFGUNS ( Special Trip ) 0534 NYL Town Ships Yes AFRIKASKOP 3 9860 HAR Yes AGAVIA, Krugersdorp 1739 JNB No AGGENEYS (Special trip) 8893 UPI Town Ships Yes AGINCOURT, Nelspruit (Special Trip) 1368 NLR Yes AGISANANG 3 2760 VRR Town Ships Yes AGULHAS (2 4) 7287 OVB Town Ships Yes AHRENS 3507 DBR No AIRDLIN, Sunninghill 2157 JNB No AIRFIELD, Benoni 1501 JNB No AIRFORCE BASE MAKHADO (special trip) 0955 PTR Yes AIRLIE, Constantia Cape Town 7945 CPT No AIRPORT INDUSTRIA, Cape Town 7525 CPT No AKASIA, Potgietersrus 0600 PTR Yes AKASIA, Pretoria 0182 JNB No AKASIAPARK Boxes 7415 CPT No AKASIAPARK, Goodwood 7460 CPT No AKASIAPARKKAMP,
    [Show full text]
  • IN the HIGH COURT of SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 231/ 2017 Dates Heard: 25 & 26 April 2018 D
    SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 231/ 2017 Dates heard: 25 & 26 April 2018 Date delivered: 3 July 2018 In the matter between N S (born A) Plaintiff And A S Defendant JUDGMENT GOOSEN, J. [1] This is an action for divorce in which the principal issue to be determined concerns the cash component of maintenance payable by the defendant. Prior to the commencement of the trial the parties reached agreement in relation to the primary care of the minor children born of the marriage. The parties also reached agreement in relation to the appointment of a receiver to effect the division of the joint estate. [2] The parties were married to each other in community of property on 25 March 2012. There are two children born of the marriage, both girls, aged 4 years and 1 year, respectively. The children are in the primary care of the plaintiff. Maintenance of the minor children is presently regulated by an interim order made by this Court, pursuant to Rule 43 on 7 December 2017. In terms of that order, Page 2 the defendant pays maintenance of R5 000.00 per month per child in addition to certain non-cash amounts relating to educational and medical related expenses of the children. [3] In her particulars of claim the plaintiff claims payment of R6 500.00 per month per child. The defendant’s plea contains a tender of payment of the amount of R3 500.00 per month per child.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS 2 No
    Vol. 651 Pretoria 20 September 2019 , September No. 42714 ( PART1 OF 2 ) LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS 2 No. 42714 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 20 SEPTEMBER 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 20 SEPTEMBER 2019 No. 42714 3 Table of Contents LEGAL NOTICES BUSINESS NOTICES • BESIGHEIDSKENNISGEWINGS Gauteng ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Eastern Cape / Oos-Kaap ................................................................................................................. 14 Free State / Vrystaat ........................................................................................................................ 15 Limpopo ....................................................................................................................................... 15 North West / Noordwes ..................................................................................................................... 15 Western Cape / Wes-Kaap ................................................................................................................ 15 COMPANY NOTICES • MAATSKAPPYKENNISGEWINGS Western Cape / Wes-Kaap ................................................................................................................ 16 LIQUIDATOR’S AND OTHER APPOINTEES’ NOTICES LIKWIDATEURS EN ANDER AANGESTELDES SE KENNISGEWINGS Gauteng ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Government Gazette Staatskoerant REPUBLIC of SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIEK VAN SUID-AFRIKA
    Government Gazette Staatskoerant REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIEK VAN SUID-AFRIKA March Vol. 657 Pretoria, 27 2020 Maart No. 43144 B LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS SALES IN EXECUTION AND OTHER PUBLIC SALES GEREGTELIKE EN ANDER OPENBARE VERKOPE ISSN 1682-5843 N.B. The Government Printing Works will 43144 not be held responsible for the quality of “Hard Copies” or “Electronic Files” submitted for publication purposes 9 771682 584003 AIDS HELPLINE: 0800-0123-22 Prevention is the cure 2 No. 43144 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 27 MARCH 2020 IMPORTANT NOTICE OF OFFICE RELOCATION Private Bag X85, PRETORIA, 0001 149 Bosman Street, PRETORIA Tel: 012 748 6197, Website: www.gpwonline.co.za URGENT NOTICE TO OUR VALUED CUSTOMERS: PUBLICATIONS OFFICE’S RELOCATION HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY SUSPENDED. Please be advised that the GPW Publications office will no longer move to 88 Visagie Street as indicated in the previous notices. The move has been suspended due to the fact that the new building in 88 Visagie Street is not ready for occupation yet. We will later on issue another notice informing you of the new date of relocation. We are doing everything possible to ensure that our service to you is not disrupted. As things stand, we will continue providing you with our normal service from the current location at 196 Paul Kruger Street, Masada building. Customers who seek further information and or have any questions or concerns are free to contact us through telephone 012 748 6066 or email Ms Maureen Toka at [email protected] or cell phone at 082 859 4910.
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of South Africa (Eastern Cape Division, Grahamstown)
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) Case No. 3917/17 In the matter between WINGS PARK PORT ELIZABETH (PTY) LTD and MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS Plasket J: [1] Wings Park Port Elizabeth (Pty) Ltd (Wings Park) applied to review a decision to refuse it environmental authorisation for the construction and operation of a private airfield in the Kragga Kamma area of Port Elizabeth. It has cited the MEC for Environmental Affairs and Tourism in the Eastern Cape provincial government (the MEC) as the first respondent, and three persons opposed to its proposed development as the second, third and fourth respondents. Only one of them, Mr Raoul van der Merwe, the second respondent, opposes the application, and he does so together with the MEC. Background [2] Wings Park was incorporated for the purpose of developing and operating a members- only airfield for recreational pilots. To this end, it purchased land in the Kragga Kamma area, to the west of Port Elizabeth. This area is described in the papers as a peri-urban area. It purchased this land, according to Dr Russell Phillips, one of Wings Park's directors (and the deponent to the founding affidavit), after a 'detailed assessment of other available options', all of which were found to be unsuitable for one reason or another. [3] The need for the new facility arose as a result of Wings Park's shareholders, all of whom are recreational pilots, finding that it had become increasingly difficult to pursue their chosen past-time from the existing facilities in Port Elizabeth – the Port Elizabeth International Airport and the Progress Aerodrome.
    [Show full text]
  • SUPERIOR COURTS ACT 10 of 2013 (Gazette No. 36743, Notice
    (28 February 2014 – to date) SUPERIOR COURTS ACT 10 OF 2013 (Gazette No. 36743, Notice No. 615 dated 12 August 2013. Commencement date: 23 August 2013 [Proc. No. R36, Gazette No. 36774]- with the exception of sections 29, 37 and 45 and Items No. 11 of Schedule 1 and No. 1.1 of Schedule 2) OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE Directive: 3/2014 RENAMING OF COURTS IN TERMS OF SECTION 6 OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS ACT NO 10 OF 2013 Government Notice 148 in Government Gazette 37390 dated 28 February 2014. Commencement date: 28 February 2014. By virtue of the powers vested in me in terms of section 8 of the Superior Courts Act, 2013 (Act no 10 of 2013) (the Act) I, Mogoeng Mogoeng, the Chief Justice of the Republic of South Africa, hereby issue the following directive: The Act created a single High Court, with various divisions constituted in terms of section 6 of the Act. In this regard all court processes in the High Court shall be headed in accordance with the Act; and all court processes shall be as headed as follows: (a) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN (b) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, BHISHO (c) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, MTHATHA (d) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH (e) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN (f) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Prepared by: Page 2 of 2 (g) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION,
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of South Africa (Eastern Cape
    REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) In the matter between: Case No: 47/2014 THEMBANI WHOLESALERS (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED Appellant And BRIAN MZWANELE SEPTEMBER First Respondent BHELEKAZI PORTIA SEPTEMBER Second Respondent Coram: Chetty, Makaula JJ and Brooks AJ Heard: 17 June 2014 Delivered: 26 June 2014 Summary: Practice – Jurisdiction – Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown – Extent of – Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 – Legislative intent – Court exercising jurisdiction over entire geographical area of Eastern Cape Province ________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ________________________________________________________________ Chetty, J Page 2 of 19 [1] This is an opposed application for summary judgment (the application) which, ordinarily, is heard before a single judge in the unopposed motion court. Quintessentially, the defence raised is one of jurisdiction. According to the particulars of claim, the principal place of business of both parties to the lis is in Ngqamakwe, an area over which the Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha, exercises jurisdiction. This court has however, for reasons which will become apparent in due course, been specially constituted pursuant to the provisions of s 14 (1) (a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 (the Act), to primarily determine whether the Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown, has the requisite jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the application. The resolution of the jurisdictional challenge necessitates an analysis of the relevant legislative framework as a precursor to determining the merits of the application. Jurisdiction [2] The balkanization of South Africa by the apartheid regime was pertinently redressed in the founding provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), which proclaimed that “the Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state .
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of South Africa Eastern Cape Division
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION – GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CC 93/2011 In the matter between: STATE and MICHAEL HUTE Accused ____________________________________________________ SENTENCE ____________________________________________________ MAGEZA AJ: 1 [I] In this matter the accused has been found guilty by this court on one count of rape of his minor daughter who was 7 years of age at the time. At the outset, it is appropriate that this court expresses its appreciation for the commendable efforts of a non-governmental agency named the National Association of Child and Youth Care Workers Association situate within the Alexandria area. This Youth Care Workers Association employs one Ms Nomzikazi Cynthia Geleba, whose commendable selflessness led to the discovery of the victim’s predicament. [2] This court in convicting Mr Hute of the rape, commented that Ms Geleba’s work involves going door to door within the community assessing each family’s state of means or levels of poverty. Her work includes assessing possible instances of the abuse of children and women in the local households. She knew the family of the victim and they lived in a two roomed shack in Jikololo Street, Kwa-Nonkqubela Township in Alexandria. She was also familiar with the victim’s parents including the unemployed mother, one Kaytie Du Plessis, herself (as was Mr Hute), unfortunately an honeybrew beer– ‘Iqhilika’ addict. [3] The dire existential reality of this family has already been canvassed in the principal findings of this court. She said there are a significant number of poor households in the area where this young bright victim and her parents live and that her parents are addicted to ‘Iqhilika’, (honey- brewed beer) which they drink and acquire from different places within the community all the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Representative Standing in South African Law
    1 REPRESENTATIVE STANDING IN SOUTH AFRICAN LAW Clive Plasket BA, LLB, LLM (Natal), PhD (Rhodes), Judge of the High Court (Eastern Cape Division), Republic of South Africa Honorary Visiting Professor, Rhodes University, Grahamstown [A] CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA: FROM COLONIAL OUTPOST TO NON-RACIAL DEMOCRACY From the second British occupation of the Cape of Good Hope in 18061 until recently, British constitutional institutions have dominated South African political life.2 At the heart of the various South African constitutions since Union in 1910 – the South Africa Act of 1909 (the union Constitution), the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act 32 of 1961 (the republican Constitution) and the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act 110 of 1983 (the tricameral Constitution) – lay the doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament. It is now widely accepted that this doctrine, because it was separated from its principal political counter-balance, universal franchise, was particularly inappropriate. It allowed for gross abuses of human rights by those in power.3 One of the dominant features of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty was that it envisaged, in the words of the late Mr Justice Ismail Mahomed, a 'legally emasculated judiciary with no judicial teeth to bite into or destroy enactments emanating from Parliament which invade without justification, the deepest wisdom of the common law, or which transgress rights so fundamental for each individual in our 1 See generally, Davenport and Saunders South Africa: A Modern History (5 ed) London, MacMillan Press Ltd: 2000, 42. 2 See Dugard Human Rights and the South African Legal Order Princeton, Princeton University Press: 1978, 8-9 and 14-28.
    [Show full text]
  • South Africa
    Opting to Settle in a Small African Town A Case Study of Refugees in Towns Makhanda (formerly Grahamstown), South Africa Barnabas Ticha Muvhuti February, 2019 Contents Location ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction and Methods........................................................................................................................ 4 The Urban Impact...................................................................................................................................... 6 Mapping Makhanda’s Immigrant Population ......................................................................................... 8 Refugees’ Experiences ............................................................................................................................ 9 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................... 14 References ............................................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix A: Background on Refugees in South Africa .................................................................... 17 Appendix B: Background on Migration in Makhanda ........................................................................ 19 About the RIT Project ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Case No
    THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Case No: 4028/2020 In the matter between: FIRSTRAND BANK LIMITED t/a WESBANK Plaintiff and ADRE SHAHIED PRINS Defendant Case No: 15702/2020 In the matter between: NEDBANK LIMITED Plaintiff and EMIL DE KOCK Defendant Coram: Bozalek J Heard: 12 February 2021 Delivered: 26 February 2021 _______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT _______________________________________________________________________ BOZALEK J [1] These two applications for default judgment for an order for the return of motor vehicles purchased in instalment sale agreements were called on my Third Division 2 (unopposed motions) roll on 12 February 2021. Upon my enquiry as to why the Registrar had declined to grant default judgment and referred the matters to open court I was advised that the reason was the Registrar’s apparent belief that he/she lacked the jurisdiction to do so. More particularly, the Registrar had interpreted the jurisdiction clauses in the underlying agreements as requiring that the claims be dealt with in the Magistrates Court. [2] The jurisdiction clause in respect of the claim by Firstrand Bank Limited trading as Wesbank reads as follows: ‘28.2 In terms of sec 45 of the Magistrates Court Act, 32 of 1944 and at our option, any claim that may arise may be recovered in any Magistrates Court having jurisdiction and you hereby consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court’. [3] In the claim brought by Nedbank the jurisdiction clause reads as follows: ‘20 Legal Proceedings You agree that any legal proceedings that may be brought in terms of this Agreement may be heard in a magistrates court, regardless of the amount claimed’.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Cape Division, Grahamstown)
    SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO: CA308/2019 Date heard: 11 March 2021 Date delivered: 16 March 2021 In the matter between: MINISTER OF POLICE Applicant and P[…] J[…] Respondent AND P[…] J[…] Applicant and MINISTER OF POLICE Respondent ___________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ___________________________________________________________________ LOWE, J: INTRODUCTION 2 [1] In this matter I will refer to the parties by their description as follows: The Minister of Police as “the Minister” and P[…] J[…] as “J[…]” in order to avoid any confusion as there are two applications before me, one by each litigant. [2] J[…] instituted action against the Minister for two claims, Unlawful Search (Claim 1) and Wrongful Arrest and Detention (Claim 2). [3] The Regional Court Magistrate found for James on both claims ordering the Minister to pay damages in the sum of R200,000.00 on Claim 1 and R80,000.00 on claim 2, in both cases with interest from demand to payment. [4] The origin of the claims is the allegation that on 8 January 2017 and at an “old age home” J[…] was unlawfully (and indecently) searched by an unknown female member of the South African Police Services, she alleging an unlawful arrest and detention the following day until she was released on bail. [5] The search, it was found, involved her being undressed down to her underclothes in humiliating circumstances including the touching of her breasts and whilst this search was in a room with only herself and the female officer, there was a camera in the room visible on a screen in another office occupied by a Mr Macky and another police officer – she being led to say they saw her “naked”.
    [Show full text]