Case Law[2025] ZAGPPHC 225South Africa
Willow Acres Homeowners Association NPC v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (53875/13) [2025] ZAGPPHC 225 (7 March 2025)
High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)
7 March 2025
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2025
>>
[2025] ZAGPPHC 225
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Willow Acres Homeowners Association NPC v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (53875/13) [2025] ZAGPPHC 225 (7 March 2025)
Willow Acres Homeowners Association NPC v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (53875/13) [2025] ZAGPPHC 225 (7 March 2025)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2025_225.html
sino date 7 March 2025
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION,
PRETORIA
CASE NO.: 53875/13
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3)
REVISED: NO
Date:
7 March 2025
E
van der Schyff
In
the matter between:
WILLOW
ACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION NPC
Applicant
and
CITY
OF TSHWANE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY
First Respondent
DOUBLE
QUICK PROPERTIES 208 (PTY) LTD
Second/Third Respondent
ABSA
BANK LIMITED
Fourth Respondent
AND
CASE
NO: 23145/2009
KUNGWINI
LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
Applicant
and
DOUBLE
QUICK PROPERTIES 208 CC
First
Respondent
WILLOW
ACRES HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION NPC
Second Respondent
JUDGMENT
Van der Schyff J
Introduction
[1]
This matter has a protracted history.
Double Quick Properties 208 CC (later Double Quick (Pty) Ltd,
referred to as Double Quick
208) erected an illegal structure on Erf
7[...], Willow Acres Ext. 8. Kungwini Local Municipality accordingly
applied under case
number 23145/09 for an order, among others, that
the building be demolished. Kungwini Local Municipality was
disestablished and
absorbed into the City of Tshwane Metropolitan
Municipality in 2011. Neither Kungwini Local Municipality before its
disestablishment,
nor the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality
(hereafter referred to as the municipality or Tshwane Metropolitan
Municipality)
prosecuted the application to finality.
[2]
Willow Acres Home Owners Association
(“Willow Acres”), the applicant under case number
53875/13, launched this application
already in 2013 to obtain a
mandamus
directing the municipality to comply with its duties to enforce
compliance with the relevant statutory and other requirements that
buildings within its jurisdictional area comply with approved
building plans and zoning, and are not illegally erected. Willow
Acres seeks an order directing the City of Tshwane Metropolitan
Municipality to persist with and prosecute the application issued
under case number 23145/09 to
finality.
[3]
The two applications, respectively issued
under case numbers 53875/13 and 23145/09, were consolidated. Willow
Acres and the Tshwane
Metropolitan Municipality share the view that
the building erected by Double Quick 208 must be demolished. Double
Quick 208, was
in final liquidation when the application by Willow
Acres was instituted. On 12 July 2024, however, the order for the
final winding
up of Double Quick Properties 208 (Pty) Ltd was set
aside, and Double Quick Properties 208 (Pty) Ltd was discharged from
liquidation.
Willow Acres subsequently filed a notice of substitution
in terms of rule 15 of the uniform rules of court, and Double Quick
Properties
208 (Pty) Ltd substituted the second and third
respondents, the erstwhile liquidators.
[4]
For purposes of the order that stands to be
granted, the true nature of the juristic person Double Quick
Properties 208, and the
time of its conversion from a closed
corporation to a private company, is irrelevant. The recent
development in Double Quick 208’s
chameleonic juristic nature,
is that I was informed during the hearing on 4 March 2025, that the
recently discharged-from-liquidation
Double Quick 208 (Pty) Ltd,
commenced business rescue proceedings, by its board resolving that
the company commence with business
rescue proceedings and the
resolution being filed as prescribed in
section 129
of the
Companies
Act 71 of 2008
.
[5]
No affidavit was filed by or on behalf of
Double Quick Properties (Pty) Ltd confirming under oath that it
commenced voluntary business
rescue proceedings. Counsel for Willow
Acres and Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality regarded it their duty as
officers of the court,
to inform the court of the information
communicated to them by Double Quick 208 (Pty) Ltd.’s legal
representative.
[6]
I was tempted to disregard information that
do not constitute evidence before the court. However, if the
information is correct,
and in the absence of an application in terms
of
s 133(1)(b)
, such an approach would have been futile. The presumed
development in any event does not affect Willow Acres’
application
under case number 53875/2013 and the relief sought by it.
[7]
Counsel for the City of Tshwane
Metropolitan Municipality submitted that the order ultimately sought
by Willow Acres is just a reflection
of the
status
quo
since the municipality is clearly
prosecuting its application to hold Double Quick 208 accountable for
its actions by seeking a
demolition order. As a result, counsel
contends that the order should not be granted, and if Willow Acres is
awarded costs, the
costs should be limited to the date when the
municipality filed its replying affidavit.
[8]
I disagree. As for the proceedings under
case number 53875/2013, Willow Acres is entitled to the relief as set
out in the draft
order handed up when the matter was argued. It
should not be for an entity like Willow Acres to take the Tshwane
Metropolitan Municipality
to task for neglecting its statutory
functions. This is also the reason why Double Quick 208’s
juristic nature is of no concern
for the order sought by Willow
Acres. The order sought by Willow Acres is to oblige the Tshwane
Metropolitan Municipality to fulfill
its statutory duties. With
regard to the history of this matter, the filing of a replying
affidavit and heads of argument in itself
would have been cold
comfort to Willow Acres. The recent development that proves to be an
obstacle in the finalisation of the application
under case number
23145/2009 emphasises the need to grant the relief sought by Willow
Acres.
[9]
As far as costs are concerned, I agree that
the matter was rather complex and that the services of two counsel
are justified. I
am, however, of the view that the complexity of the
issues raised justifies a cost order on scale B.
[10]
As for application 23145/2009, in the
absence of an application in terms of
section 133
(1)(b) of the
Companies Act 71 of 2008
, or any submissions that the voluntary
business rescue proceedings are bogus, or an abuse of court process,
this court cannot continue
with the legal proceedings. There is,
however, no obstacle preventing this court from granting an order for
certainty to be obtained
regarding Double Quick 208 (Pty) Ltd’s
position.
ORDER
In
the result, the following order is granted:
Re:
Case number 53875/2013
1.
A mandamus is issued whereby the
CITY OF
TSHWANE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY
(“the
Municipality”) is directed to persist with and prosecute the
application issued in this court and commenced under
case number
23145/2009, as fast as reasonably possible and effectively to
finality, subject to the general moratorium imposed by
Section 133
of
the
Companies Act, 71 of 2008
;
2.
The Municipality is ordered to pay the applicant's costs under case
number
53875/2013, including the costs of two counsel on scale B,
where so employed.
Re:
Case number 23145/2009
1.
The application is postponed
sine die;
2.
Double Quick 208 (Pty) Ltd is ordered to file an affidavit
accompanied by the necessary documentary proof,
confirming its status
as being in voluntary business rescue, within three days of this
order being served via email to its attorney
of record, Hennie Kotzé
Attorneys;
3.
In the event that no such affidavit is filed, the applicant in case
number 23145/2009 may re-enroll the
application, supplemented to the
extent necessary, before Van der Schyff J after having obtained a
date from her secretary, and
the notice of set down may be served on
Double Quick (Pty) Ltd via email to its attorney of record Hennie
Kotzé Attorneys:
3.1. In the event that
papers are supplemented, Double Quick 208 (Pty) Ltd must be served
with the supplemented papers before a
date for the hearing of the
application is arranged;
4.
The issue of the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality’s
wasted costs caused by the postponement
is reserved.
E
van der Schyff
Judge of the High Court
Delivered:
This judgment is handed down electronically by uploading it to the
electronic file of this matter on CaseLines.
For
Willow Acres HomeOwners’ Association NPC:
Adv.
JF van der Merwe
Instructed
by:
AJ
van Rensburg Inc.
For
the Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality:
Adv.
JA Motepe SC
With:
Adv.
K Mapengo
Instructed
by:
Mothle
Jooma Sabdia Inc.
Date
of the hearing:
4
March 2025
Date
of judgment:
7
March 2025
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Willow Acres Estate Home Owners Association v Mahloboagane and Another (11789/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1817 (17 October 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 1817High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)99% similar
Willow Park Minor Ext 86 Home Owners Association (NPC) v Siwela (010020/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1333 (28 November 2025)
[2025] ZAGPPHC 1333High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
Willow Investments (Pty) Ltd v Sanlam Private Wealth (Pty) Ltd and Another (44726/18) [2022] ZAGPPHC 18 (3 January 2022)
[2022] ZAGPPHC 18High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
Silwood Centre CC and Another v D Edwards CC t/a Campground Motors and Others (Leave to Appeal) (187776/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1275 (9 December 2025)
[2025] ZAGPPHC 1275High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)97% similar
Silverlakes Homeowners Association v Community Schemes Ombud Service and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 281; 13725/2022 (11 May 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 281High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)97% similar