City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Ryckloff Bellegings (Pty) Ltd (18156/19) [2023] ZAGPJHC 868 (7 June 2023)

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: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2023 >> [2023] ZAGPJHC 868 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Ryckloff Bellegings (Pty) Ltd (18156/19) [2023] ZAGPJHC 868 (7 June 2023) City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Ryckloff Bellegings (Pty) Ltd (18156/19) [2023] ZAGPJHC 868 (7 June 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2023_868.html sino date 7 June 2023 ###### IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 18156/19 NOT REPORTABLE NOT OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES REVISED 07/06/23 In the matter between: The CITY of JOHANNESBURG METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY (72 nd RESPONDENT in the main application) 1 st APPLICANT THE EXECUTIVE MAYOR (73 rd RESPONDENT in the main application ) 2 nd APPLICANT THE CITY MANAGER (74th RESPONDENT in the main application ) 3 rd APPLICANT THE DIRECTOR OF HOUSING ( 75 th RESPONDENT  in the main application ) 4 th APPLICANT And MS NTOMBEKHAYA BONKOLO AND 70 OTHERS, 1-71st RESPONDENTS in the main application And RYCKLOFF–BELLEGINGS (PTY) LTD  APPLICANT in the main application JUDGMENT – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL – WRIGHT J 1. On 4 October 2022 I heard the main application which had been brought by Ryckloff for the eviction of Ms Ntombekhaya Bonkolo and other persons.  I handed down a typed, signed judgment on the same day. 2. The 72 nd to 75 th Respondents in the main application now seek leave to appeal my order to the Supreme Court of Appeal. 3. It would appear that their attorney timeously delivered the present application for leave to appeal on 13 October 2022. 4. It was only on 28 February 2023 that I learned, through my clerk of the existence of the present application for leave to appeal. Despite my best efforts, the application for leave was heard only on 7 June 2023. 5. Only the 1 st to 71 st respondents in the main application oppose leave to appeal. Ryckloff supports leave and to the Supreme Court of Appeal. 6. With the provisions of section 17(1)(a)i of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013 in mind, I am of the view that the applicants for leave to appeal have a reasonable prospect on appeal. 7. Under section 17(6)(a)i , I am of the view that the appeal involves a question of law of importance. 8. Under section 17(6)(a)ii , I consider that the administration of justice, generally and in this case requires consideration of the appeal by the Supreme Court of Appeal. ORDER 1. The 1 st to 4 th applicants, being the 72 nd to 75 th Respondents in the main application are granted leave to appeal the order of Wright J. 2. Leave is to the Supreme Court of Appeal. 3. Costs in the appeal. GC Wright Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division, Johannesburg HEARD : 7 June 2023 DELIVERED :  7 June 2023 APPEARANCES : 1 st to 4 th APPLICANTS (72 nd to 75 th RESPONDENTS in the main application) Adv C GEORGIADES SC Adv N MAHLANGU 1 st to 71 st RESPONDENTS in the main application Adv I DE VOS 76 th RESPONDENT No appearance APPLICANT in the main application Adv W MOKHARE SC Adv M MAJOZI AMICUS CURIAE No appearance sino noindex make_database footer start