https://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / News / All News RSS ← Back
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Sponsored by

Close

Article Enquiry

New home owners not liable for historical debt, ConCourt rules


Close

Embed Video

New home owners not liable for historical debt, ConCourt rules

 New home owners not liable for historical debt, ConCourt rules

29th August 2017

By: News24Wire

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

The Constitutional Court on Tuesday ruled that new home owners are not liable for historical debt taken over from previous owners.

Municipalities such as Tshwane, eThekwini and Ekurhuleni – as well as the cooperative and governance minister – argued against a landmark high court judgment in 2016, which made a similar ruling.

Advertisement

The high court application saw property owners take on Tshwane and Ekurhuleni for cutting municipal services to new home owners who had inherited historical debt.

"The applicants complained that they faced darkness, having no electricity, and many other inhumane conditions because they bought property whose previous owners failed to meet their obligations to the municipality," the court explained in a media briefing.

Advertisement

The municipalities had argued that it was lawful for them to attach and sell a newly purchased property to extract money for debt owed to them.

In a unanimous judgment, the court ruled that the provision in Section 118 (3) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000 is well capable of being interpreted so that the charge does not survive transfer, the court explained.

“The court held that a mere statutory provision … that a claim for a specified debt is a ‘charge’ upon immovable property does not make that charge transmissible to successors in title of property.

“Public formalisation of the charge is required so as to give notice of its creation to the world.”

The court ruled that, to avoid unjustified arbitrariness in violation of 25(1) of the Bill of Rights, Section 118 (3) must be interpreted so that the charge it imposes does not survive transfer to the new owner.

As such, the ConCourt said it did not need to confirm the high court ruling, but granted the applicants a declaration that the charge does not survive transfer.

The municipalities and the minister were ordered to pay costs.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options

Email Registration Success

Thank you, you have successfully subscribed to one or more of Creamer Media’s email newsletters. You should start receiving the email newsletters in due course.

Our email newsletters may land in your junk or spam folder. To prevent this, kindly add newsletters@creamermedia.co.za to your address book or safe sender list. If you experience any issues with the receipt of our email newsletters, please email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za