Traffic

VERKEERSBEAMPTE LÊ BESLAG OP JOU SELFOON: WAT MOET JY WEET?

A4_BSedert 2011 het die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie, 2011 dit moontlik gemaak vir ‘n gemagtigde beampte om jou sellulêre toestel te konfiskeer indien jy betrap word wanneer jy dit in jou motor gebruik terwyl jy bestuur. Hier is ‘n paar belangrike feite om te onthou sodat jy kan seker maak dat al die regte prosedures gevolg word wanneer op jou sellulêre toestel beslag gelê word.

Die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie, 2011 (hierna “die Ordonnansie”) verbied eerstens die bestuur van ‘n motorvoertuig op ‘n openbare pad terwyl jy ‘n sellulêre of mobiele telefoon of enige ander kommunikasietoestel met enige deel van jou liggaam vashou en tweedens, die gebruik van ‘n sellulêre of mobiele telefoon of enige ander kommunikasietoestel terwyl jy bestuur, tensy dit aan die voertuig vasgemaak is (soos ‘n handvrye stelsel).[1]

Volgens die Ordonnansie mag ‘n gemagtigde beampte in die belang van publieke veiligheid ‘n kommunikasietoestel konfiskeer, mits hy die eienaar inlig oor die redes daarvoor. Hy moet ‘n kwitansie aan die eienaar uitreik wat die plek waar sy eiendom teruggeëis kan word, aandui, en hy moet alle prosedures wat in enige beleid van die stad oor konfiskering en beslaglegging vervat is, volg.[2] Die beleid van toepassing in die Stad Kaapstad is bekend as die Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere, 2012.

‘n Gemagtigde amptenaar wat in terme van enige Ordonnansie van die Stad optree, moet ‘n kwitansie aan die oortreder gee vir enige eiendom wat verwyder en op beslag gelê is. Hierdie kwitansie moet die volgende aandui:

  • ‘n Lys van die eiendom wat verwyder is;
  • die toestand van die eiendom (want die eiendom moet teruggegee word in dieselfde toestand as waarin dit was toe dit verwyder is);
  • die adres waar die eiendom geberg gaan word;
  • die ure waartydens die goedere afgehaal mag word;
  • die maksimum tydperk vir die berging van die eiendom voordat daarmee weggedoen kan word;
  • die voorwaardes vir die vrystelling van die eiendom waarop beslag gelê is;
  • die naam en kantoornommer van ‘n raadsamptenaar aan wie enige betoog oor die beslaglegging gerig kan word;
  • die afsnydatum en -tyd vir die rig van die betoog;
  • die terme en voorwaardes van die verkoop van eiendom wat nie teruggeëis is nie, per openbare veiling.[3]

Die Stad mag enige nie-teruggeëisde sellulêre stelsel negentig dae na die beslaglegging per openbare veiling verkoop wat in die plaaslike koerante geadverteer is. Munisipale amptenare en raadslede, hul gades, familie en kennisse mag nie hierdie eiendom koop nie. Fooie mag gehef word vir die berging van die sellulêre toestel, asook enige ander koste wat deur die raad aangegaan is in die tydperk van beslaglegging. Hierdie fooie word deur die raad bepaal en mag van tyd tot tyd aangepas word. Fooie en boetes moet by die Raad se kontantkantoor tussen 08:00 en 16:00 op Maandag tot Vrydag betaal word.[4]

Eiendom mag aan die eienaar of sy/haar verteenwoordiger teruggegee word op voorlegging van bewys van betaling van alle fooie wat met die beslaglegging verband hou en enige boetes wat tydens beslaglegging opgelê is. Eienaars of hulle verteenwoordigers kan hul eiendom afhaal tydens die tye en op die plek aangedui in die skutkennisgewing wat op die oortreder bedien is.[5]

Beamptes van die Stad moet redelike stappe neem om enige skade aan eiendom waarop beslag gelê is, te voorkom, maar hulle sal nie verantwoordelik wees vir enige skade wat aan die eiendom gerig is waar ‘n redelike sorgsplig uitgeoefen is nie. Digitale foto’s moet van alle goedere waarop beslag gelê is, geneem word.[6]

‘n Persoon wat ‘n bepaling van hierdie Ordonnansie oortree, pleeg ‘n misdryf en ‘n persoon wat so ‘n misdryf pleeg, is by skuldigbevinding aanspreeklik vir ‘n boete of gevangenisstraf van nie meer nie as 3 jaar, of beide.[7] 

Verwysingslys

  • Die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie, 2011.
  • Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere, 2012.

[1]A 38(1) van die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie.

[2]A 38(4) van die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie.

[3] A8, A9 van die Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere, 2012.

[4]A10, A11 van die Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere.

[5]A12 van die Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere.

[6]A16 van die Standaard Werkproses op die Beslaglegging van Goedere en Diere.

[7]A39 van die Stad van Kaapstad: Verkeers Ordonnansie.

Hierdie is ‘n algemene inligtingstuk en moet gevolglik nie as regs- of ander professionele advies benut word nie. Geen aanspreeklikheid kan aanvaar word vir enige foute of weglatings of enige skade of verlies wat volg uit die gebruik van enige inligting hierin vervat nie. Kontak altyd u regsadviseur vir spesifieke en toegepaste advies.

Consumer Law

THE CONSUMER’S RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

A3_BCan a consumer take you, the service provider, to court because they did not understand some of the terms and conditions of your signed contract? Beware, the answer is Yes!

From April 2011 the Consumer Protection Act came into full effect with the result that it is now against the law to use difficult-to-understand language in any business document or contract.

Business usually comes with some kind of paperwork, whether it’s a contract, a letter of agreement or even an instruction booklet. These vital documents are often written in language that is hard to understand for the average consumer, which is why there are specific Plain Language regulations in The Consumer Protection Act to prevent consumers signing documents they do not understand.

Protecting the consumer

The Act’s express purpose is to make sure consumers are not treated unfairly – intentionally or not. This means that using plain language is more crucial than ever. From now on, using obscure and confusing wording, especially in binding contracts, is not allowed. Quite simply, it’s illegal!

Too many consumers have landed in big trouble, especially financial trouble, because they haven’t understood what they’ve signed. Sometimes contracts are written in bloated, bureaucratic jargon just because that’s the way it has always been, or because the people writing the contracts don’t know any other way to do it. Often, though, unscrupulous businesses have used complicated language on purpose, as a way to trick consumers into paying for something they can’t afford, to sign away their rights, or to agree to unfair terms and conditions.

Defining plain language

The Consumer Protection Act defines plain language in Part D, Section 22 as follows:

“For the purposes of this Act, a notice, document or visual representation is in plain language if it is reasonable to conclude that an ordinary consumer of the class of persons for whom the notice, document or visual representation is intended, with average literacy skills and minimal experience as a consumer of the relevant goods or services, could be expected to understand the content, significance, and import of the document without undue effort, having regard to:

  1. The context, comprehensiveness and consistency of the notice, document or visual representation;
  2. The organisation, form and style of the notice, document or visual representation;
  3. The vocabulary, usage and sentence structure of the notice, document or visual representation; and
  4. The use of any illustrations, examples, headings, or other aids to reading and understanding.”

This means that one won’t be permitted to word things so widely that they can be understood in several ways. The Act states that if there is any doubt about the meaning of certain words or terms and conditions, the benefit will go to the consumer.

Even advertising and marketing may no longer contain any ambiguity. Advertisements won’t be allowed to exaggerate and they will have to be easy to understand, fair and honest. The Act states that service providers will have to spell out everything in words that consumers can understand, alternatively the consumers have the right to full disclosure and information in plain and understandable language.

So, don’t delay. If you have a business document or contract that has been used for generations you might have to take a second look at it to edit or reword it so that it complies with the Consumer Protection Act.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.

Contracts

KANSELLASIE VAN DAARDIE GIMNASIUMKONTRAK

A2_BAlmal van ons het al Nuwejaarsvoornemens gemaak.

Hierdie jaar gaan ek begin oefen, gesond eet, minder tyd op kantoor bestee en meer tyd met die gesin deurbring. Om jou voorneme uit te voer, sluit jy dadelik na terugkeer van jou Desembervakansie by die plaaslike gimnasium aan.  Dit pla nie eers of die kontrak vir twee, drie of selfs vier jaar is nie. Hierdiejaar gaan jy by daardie voorneme hou!

Met die aanbreek van die winter bestee jy al hoe meer tyd op kantoor en voor die kaggel en minder tyd in die gimnasium. Teen Augustus herken jy die debietorder van die gimnasium op jou bankstaat, terwyl jy goed weet dat jy twee maande laas by die gimnasium was.

Die Wet op Verbruikersbeskerming (“die wet”) beperk die effek van ‘n vastetermynkontrak wat ‘n outomatiese hernuwingsklousule vir ‘n verdere vaste termyn bevat. Aangesien die wetgewer wye betekenis heg aan die terme goedere (“goods”) en dienste (“services”) sal die meerderheid vastetermynkontrakte binne die reikwydte van die wet val. Artikel 16 van die wet maak voorsiening daarvoor dat enige verbruiker ‘n langtermynkontrak kan kanselleer met skriftelike kennisgewing van twintig besigheidsdae, tensy die kontrak tussen twee juridiese persone is.

Die wet maak vervolgens voorsiening vir ‘n redelike kansellasieboete (“reasonable cancellation penalty”) wat deur die verbruiker aan die diensverskaffer betaal moet word weens die kansellasie van die vastetermynkontrak. Wat ‘n redelike kansellasieboete behels, sal afhang van die tipe en aard van die kontrak.

Lester Timothy van Deneys Reitz Prokureurs gebruik ‘n voorbeeld wat by die meeste van ons aanklank sal vind. ‘n Verbruiker sluit ‘n tweejaarkontrak met ‘n selfoondiensverskaffer. ‘n Selfoon word gelyktydig aangekoop, die koopprys waarvan maandeliks oor die tweejaartermyn afbetaal moet word. Die diensverskaffer het dus ‘n uitgawe aangegaan wat betref die selfoon.  Sou die verbruiker die kontrak kanselleer, is dit derhalwe aanvaarbaar dat die diensverskaffer die uitstaande balans van die selfoon as ‘n redelike kansellasieboete hef ten einde sy onkostes te verhaal.

Waar ‘n verskaffer geen noemenswaardige ekstra koste moet dra as gevolg van kansellasie van die kontrak nie sal die verskaffer afslag aan die verbruiker moet gee ten einde ‘n redelike kansellasieboete vas te stel.

Jy kan dus die gimnasium nader en skriftelik twintig werksdae kennis gee van jou voorneme om die kontrak te kanselleer. Afhangend van die bewoording in die kontrak en die oorblywende  kontraktermyn, sal jy ‘n redelike kansellasieboete moet betaal. Aangesien die gimnasium nie beduidende ekstra koste aangegaan het as gevolg van die kansellasie nie, sal jy geregtig wees op ‘n afslag op die oorblywende termyn van die kontrak.

Onderhandel oor die kansellasieboete met die gimnasium. Jy sal verras wees wat ‘n onmiddellike betaalaanbod as ‘n kansellasieboete kan vermag. En koop eerder hardloopskoene volgende jaar, selfs al is hulle duur. Hulle sal geduldig in jou klerekas wag tot die volgende Nuwejaarsdag…

Hierdie is ‘n algemene inligtingstuk en moet gevolglik nie as regs- of ander professionele advies benut word nie. Geen aanspreeklikheid kan aanvaar word vir enige foute of weglatings of enige skade of verlies wat volg uit die gebruik van enige inligting hierin vervat nie. Kontak altyd u regsadviseur vir spesifieke en toegepaste advies.

Commercial, Labour Law, SARS

BASIESE REGISTRASIES EN NAKOMING VIR BESIGHEDE

A1_BVir enige besigheid wat in Suid-Afrika sake doen, is dit ‘n uitdaging om op die hoogte te bly van alle vereiste registrasies en nakoming wat deur wetgewing en ander regulering voorgeskryf word. Hier volg ‘n opsomming van die mees algemene registrasies en nakoming wat op die meeste besighede van toepassing is.

  1. Jaarlikse opgawes en jaargelde (Maatskappye): Enige maatskappy wat by die CIPC geregistreer wil bly, moet jaarliks gedurende die maatskappy se verjaardagmaand ‘n opgawe van inligting by die CIPC indien en ook die gepaardgaande jaargeld betaal. (www.cipc.co.za)
  1. Inkomstebelasting: Enige onderneming wat handel dryf moet by die Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomstediens (SAID) as ‘n belastingbetaler registreer, hetsy as individu/eenmansaak, maatskappy, trust, of enige ander persoon. Jaarliks moet hierdie onderneming ‘n inkomstebelastingopgawe (IB12 of IB14) voltooi en indien. Verder moet daar elke ses maande voorlopige belasting bereken en ‘n opgawe (IRP6) ingedien word, en indien nodig, moet enige verskuldigde bedrag ook betaal word. Nie-nakoming kan aansienlike boetes tot gevolg hê. (www.sars.gov.za)
  1. Belasting op Toegevoegde Waarde (BTW): Indien die jaarlikse omset van die onderneming R1 miljoen sal oorskry, moet die onderneming vir BTW registreer. ‘n Vrywillige registrasie kan gedoen word indien die omset meer as R50 000 per jaar sal wees. BTW-opgawes moet gewoonlik elke twee maande ingedien word en, indien nodig, moet enige verskuldigde bedrag ook betaal word. (www.sars.gov.za)
  1. Werkloosheidsversekering: Indien ‘n onderneming werknemers in diens het, moet die onderneming as werkgewer vir werkloosheidsversekering registreer. Maandelikse opgawes vir betaling moet ingedien word. ‘n Bedrag gelykstaande aan een persent van die salarisse van werknemers is deur die werkgewer betaalbaar, en ‘n verdere een persent deur die werknemer. (www.labour.gov.za)
  1. Werknemersbelasting: Indien enige van die werknemers van ‘n onderneming se vergoeding die perk in die Belastingwet oorskry, moet die onderneming as werkgewer vir LBS (lopende betaalstelsel) registreer. Die belasting moet maandeliks van sodanige werknemers se vergoeding afgetrek word en aan die SAID oorbetaal word tesame met die indiening van die nodige opgawes. Daar moet ook twee keer per jaar ‘n LBS-rekonsiliasie (IRP501) opgestel en by die SAID ingedien word. Jaarliks moet daar saam met die LBS-rekonsiliasie ook IRP5-sertifikate vir alle werknemers uitgemaak word. (www.sars.gov.za)
  1. Vaardigheidsontwikkelingsheffing: Indien die totale jaarlikse salarisrekening van die onderneming R500 000 oorskry, of indien die onderneming meer as 50 werknemers het, moet die onderneming ook vir die vaardigheidsontwikkelingsheffing (SDL) registreer, en moet daar ook maandeliks opgawes ingedien en die nodige heffing betaal word. (www.labour.gov.za / www.sars.gov.za)
  1. Vergoedingskommissaris: Enige onderneming wat werknemers in diens het, ongeag die vergoeding wat vir sodanige werknemers betaal word, moet as werkgewer vir ongevalleversekering by die Departement van Arbeid registreer. Die onderneming moet jaarliks ‘n opgawe by die departement indien en word dan aangeslaan teen ‘n persentasie van die totale salarisrekening van die onderneming. Werknemers wat aan diens beseer word, kan dan vergoeding van hierdie fonds eis. (www.labour.gov.za)
  1. Gelyke Indiensneming: ‘n Onderneming wat meer as 50 werknemers in diens het, of wat die gestelde drempel van jaarlikse omset vir die spesifieke sektor waarin dit handel dryf, oorskry, moet elke twee jaar ‘n gelyke indiensnemingsplan opstel en by die Departement van Arbeid indien. (www.labour.gov.za)

Hierdie is ‘n algemene inligtingstuk en moet gevolglik nie as regs- of ander professionele advies benut word nie. Geen aanspreeklikheid kan aanvaar word vir enige foute of weglatings of enige skade of verlies wat volg uit die gebruik van enige inligting hierin vervat nie. Kontak altyd u regsadviseur vir spesifieke en toegepaste advies.

Liquidation

THE LIQUIDATION OF A COMPANY OR CLOSE CORPORATION

A1_BLiquidation is more commonly known as “bankruptcy” of a business. In layman’s terms this terminology refers to the fact that a business is in such a bad financial state that the creditors cannot be paid.

Liquidation refers to the bankruptcy of a company, close corporation or some other legal entity. In the legal process of liquidation the company is placed in the control of a liquidator. It is the duty of the liquidator to realize the company’s assets for the sole purpose to divide the proceeds fairly amongst the creditors. The liquidator must dissolve the legal entity in an orderly fashion.

According to the Insolvency and the Company Law Acts  the “members” of the legal entity may apply for the liquidation thereof. Such members include directors, creditors, shareholders, employees or even investors.

An liquidation application for a company may only be brought at the High Court. In the event of a close corporation the Magistrate’s Court does have the necessary jurisdiction to grant the final liquidation of such corporation. The liquidation order will normally be granted by the Court if the Applicant successfully made out a clear case that the company or close corporation is unable to pay its debts and that it is fair and equitable that the company/corporation be wound up.

What is the procedure that needs to be followed when applying for the liquidation of a company or close corporation? The attorney firstly has a consultation with the Applicant and during such consultation will the attorney advise whether liquidation is indeed the best option in the given circumstances. From the commencement of the process it approximately takes about between four to six weeks before the application is heard in court, unless the application is brought on an urgent basis. The Applicant does not appear in Court; only the legal representatives appear on the Applicant’s behalf. After the provisional order is granted and a return day for the final order is established, the Master of the High Court will appoint a liquidator. The liquidator will then take charge of the legal entity’s affairs. Once a liquidator is appointed the Applicant’s legal representative will set up a meeting with him/her during which the attorney negotiates on behalf of the Applicant with the appointed liquidator. After the provisional order is granted the attorney for the Applicant has to attend to certain legally prescribed formalities before the appearance in Court on the return day. The time frame between the first day of the application and the return day is more or less three weeks.

After the final order is granted the liquidator will realize the legal entity’s assets which fall in the insolvent estate. The liquidator distributes a dividend amongst the creditors.

Written by: Annerine du Plessis

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.

Insolvensie

MISBRUIK VAN DIE INSOLVENSIEWET

A1_BOp 4 Maart 2014 het Regter Binns-Ward in die Kaapse Hooggeregshof ‘n interdik teen ‘n maatskappy toegestaan wat bedrog gepleeg het in terme van die Insolvensiewet (hierna verwys as ‘die Wet’). Die maatskappy dit as volg gedoen:

Elke week soek die maatskappy se werknemers deur die ‘Groen Staatskoerant’ vir advertensies van verkope eksekusie van residensiële eiendomme. Die maatskappy het konsultante in diens regoor die land gehad. Die konsultante werf dan die besigheid van die betrokke eksukusie skuldenaars. Die skuldenaars word deur die konsultante ingelig dat ‘n kansellasie van die verkoop in eksekusie bereik kan word in terme van die Insolvensiewet. Die maatskappy bied aan om toe te sien tot die publikasie van ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe ingevolge Artikel 4(1) van die Wet, onderhewig aan die betaling van ‘n fooi aan die maatskappy. Hulle lig die skuldenaar ook in dat daar geen gevolge sal wees indien ‘n aansoek by die hof nie volg nie. Dit wen vir die skuldenaar 30 dae. In dié 30 dae het die maatskappy, indien die skuldenaar wil en teen ‘n addisionele fooi, ‘n kans om ‘n forensiese oudit te doen wat met groot waarskynlikheid sal bewys dat die eksekusieskuldeiser (dikwels banke) sy eis misreken het en die skuldenaar het dan ‘n geleentheid om ‘n kompromie te bereik met die eksekusieskuldeiser.

Wanneer skuldenaars op hul betalings in verstek bly, stuur die banke ‘n opdrag na hul prokureurs toe om aksie teen die skuldenaars te neem. Die bank kan die regskostes terug eis van die skuldenaar, maar net in ‘n aparte rekening met ‘n verskillende rentekoers; hulle word nie toegelaat om dit by te voeg by die balans van die verband met ‘n ander rentekoers nie. Hulle kan net inskrywings met betrekking tot hul verbandpaaiemente by die rekening voeg, nie regskoste nie. Die maatskappy betwis dan dat die bank kontrakbreuk pleeg en doen by die hof aansoek vir die tersydestelling van die verstekvonnis.

Wat sê die Insolvensiewet?
Artikel 4(1) van die Wet vereis dat ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe nie meer as dertig dae nie, maar minder as veertien dae voor aansoek gedoen word vir oorgawe van die boedel van die skuldenaar, gepubliseer word. Artikel 5(1) van die Wet bepaal dat dit onwettig is om enige eiendom van die skuldenaar waarop beslag gelê is in terme van ‘n lasbrief van eksekusie, te verkoop, indien hy reeds ‘n kennisgewing van boedel oorgawe in terme van Artikel 4(1) van die Wet gepubliseer het in die Staatskoerant (hierdie voorsiening is vir bona fide vrywillige oorgawe aansoeke, nie bedrieglike aansoeke nie), tensy die persoon belas met die lasbrief nie geweet het van die publikasie nie, en die eiendom gewaardeer is vir minder as R5000.

Die besluit om ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe te publiseer deur ‘n skuldenaar vereis die voorneme van die skuldenaar om uiteindelik by die hof so ‘n aansoek in te dien en die nodige stappe te neem om sodanige sekwestrasiebevel te verkry. ‘n Mens kan ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe onttrek (in terme van Artikel 7) deur skriftelike toestemming van die Meester van die Hof aan te vra. Alternatiewelik kan jy in terme van Artikel 6 die kennisgewing onttrek, deurdat dit verval indien geen aansoek vir oorgawe gemaak word na 14 dae na die datum in die kennisgewing van oorgawe nie. Hierdie bepaling moet egter tot voordeel van die skuldeisers wees, nie die skuldenaars nie. Artikel 6 maak dit duidelik dat geen wettige doel gedien kan word deur die publikasie van ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe indien die betrokke boedel nie werklik insolvent is nie, en as dit nie bewys kan word nie, word die sekwestrasiekoste betaal en die sekwestrasie is tot voordeel van die Skuldeisers.

Hierdie saak het gegaan oor ‘n aansoek aan die hof, waar die applikant ‘n interdik versoek het teen die respondent in terme van die kennisgewings van oorgawe wat die maatskappy (onwettig) publiseer in terme van Artikel 4(1) van die Insolvensiewet. Die hof het ’n interdik toegestaan teen die maatskappy om hierdie soort besigheid onmiddellik te staak. Die hof het besluit dat dit onwettig en bedrieglik is en ‘n misbruik van die bepalings van die Insolvensiewet. Dit is duidelik, as mens die feite van die saak bestudeer, dat die skuldenaars nooit van voornemens was om voort te gaan met die oorgawe nie; dit is bloot gedoen met die doel om die verkope in eksekusie te frustreer. Publisering van ‘n kennisgewing van oorgawe is nie ‘n aanvaarbare metode vir die verkryging van tyd om forensiese oudits van die kliënte se rekeninge by die eksekusieskuldeiser te onderneem nie, of gronde om aansoek te doen vir die tersydestelling van die vonnis wat in die proses is om uitgevoer te word nie.

Ten slotte is dit belangrik om daarop te let dat die publisering van kennisgewings in terme van Artikel 4(1) van die Wet slegs mag plaasvind indien daar ‘n voorneme van sekwestrasie is.

Vir verdere inligting:
FirstRand Bank Limited (Applikant) v Consumer Guardian Services (Pty) Ltd & 9 Others (Saak no: 10978/2012)

Hierdie is ‘n algemene inligtingstuk en moet gevolglik nie as regs- of ander professionele advies benut word nie. Geen aanspreeklikheid kan aanvaar word vir enige foute of weglatings of enige skade of verlies wat volg uit die gebruik van enige inligting hierin vervat nie. Kontak altyd u regsadviseur vir spesifieke en toegepaste advies.

Title deed

DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS WRITTEN IN YOUR TITLE DEED?

A1_BBefore buying a property or submitting your building plans to the Town Council you should inspect the Title Deed, because failure to do so could become a costly exercise. The Title Deed will indicate all the registered servitudes and restrictive conditions applicable to the specific property.

A.     SERVITUDES

A few of these urban servitudes are discussed below:

  1. The right of the owner of the dominant stand to prohibit the erection of buildings on the servient property either at all, or beyond a certain height, or the right to an open view or the right to access of light, which restricts the servient property from impeding the view/light by buildings or trees.
  2. The servitude of support is the right to require one’s neighbour to support the weight of one’s house or wall or the right to drive a beam into one’s neighbour’s building. This could also be a reciprocal servitude and prevents either owner from demolishing his or her building and thus withdrawing the support which the other building receives from it. The owner of the servient stand is bound to keep the wall concerned in a good order at his own expense.
  3. The right to build on the servient property, for instance, to have a veranda encroach upon it or to have a balcony into its airspace.
  4. The right to receipt or non-receipt of dripping rainwater or water coming from a stream, or the right to have a rainwater drain discharging water onto the neighbour’s stand.
  5. Right of way is the right to walk across another person’s property or to drive a vehicle across it. 

The rights and duties of the owners of the dominant and servient properties

The rights and duties depend on the agreement constituting the servitude, which will be strictly interpreted in a manner which is least burdensome for the servient property. The owner of the dominant property must exercise his rights with due regards to the rights of the other party, which means that the servitude must be exercised in a proper and careful manner so as to cause the least inconvenience to the servient owner. This does not, however, restrict the owner of dominant property in the exercise of his or her rights merely because in doing so he or she will prejudice the owner of the servient property. Since a praedial servitude runs with the land any person who occupies the dominant property may exercise it. However, the owner of the dominant property is not permitted to assign his or her servitude for the benefit of another property than the dominant property.

The general rule is that a servitude cannot impose an active or positive duty on the owner of the servient property. There are only two exceptions to this rule, namely the servitude to compel the owner to construct a building of a certain height, and the servitude which imposes a duty to keep the wall in a good state of repair. 

Termination of these servitudes

  1. By agreement: A servitude may be terminated by agreement between the parties, which needs to be registered in the Deeds Office to bind subsequent purchasers.
  2. Abandonment: For example the failure to object to the erection of a fence or the closure of a road.
  3. Prescription: A positive servitude is lost if the holder fails to exercise his or her rights for an uninterrupted period of 30 years; however, this is not the case with a negative servitude.
  4. Destruction of either of the properties. 

B.     RESTRICTIVE CONDITIONS

These are statutory restrictions imposed on the owner of land in pursuance of specific township establishment legislation and registered against the Title Deeds of the stands for the reciprocal benefit of owners, and for the purpose of restraining the specific character of the neighbourhood.

A few Township conditions are mentioned here:

  1. The erf is subject to a servitude for sewerage or other purposes along one or two boundaries.
  2. No large-rooted trees may be planted within the servitude area.
  3. No buildings or other structures may be erected within the servitude area.
  4. The local authority shall be entitled to deposit temporarily on the land adjoining the servitude such material as may be excavated during the construction, maintenance or removal of sewerage works.
  5. Proposals to overcome detrimental soil conditions shall be contained in the building plans submitted for approval.
  6. The design of all structures and buildings to be erected shall be approved by a structural engineer.
  7. Except with the written approval of the authority the roofs of the buildings shall be of tiles, slate or thatch.
  8. No shop, factory or industry may be erected on the erf. 

From this it is clear that restrictive conditions can play a definite role in determining the character of a township, as well as have certain economic implications.

Other restrictive conditions that may be contained in Title Deeds

  1. Restriction to subdivision of land
  2. Conditions relating to the use to which the stand may be put
  3. Conditions restricting the alienation of the land 

Restrictive conditions may be removed or modified in one of the following ways:

  1. By agreement.
  2. By application to court.
  3. The Administrator has the power to alter, remove or suspend certain restrictions or obligations binding an owner of land in his/her province.
  4. The Minister of Public Works may consent to the amendment or cancellation of conditions registered in Title Deeds.
  5. Provincial legislation contains procedures to remove restrictions on the subdivision of land or the purposes for which the land may be used.

There are a few others that will not be discussed here.

In light of the above it’s imperative that one should carefully study the Title Deed before buying a property or building.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.

Consumer Law, Uncategorized

THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT AND THE NATIONAL CREDIT ACT, AND THE POSSIBILITY OF PENALTIES WITH EARLY SETTLEMENT OF CREDIT AGREEMENTS

A4Mr Black buys a BMW car in terms of a hire purchase agreement and the financing is done through BMW Finance. After a few months Mr Black inherits a huge sum of money and decides that he wants to settle the outstanding amount. Mr Black’s concern is whether the credit provider is entitled to charge a penalty fee for early settlement of the outstanding finance amount.

The first step in answering the abovementioned question will be to determine which laws regulate the situation. The legislation that applies here will be the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 and the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008.

In the above scenario a distinction should be drawn between the scope of each of these Acts, as the one pertains to the credit agreement itself and the other to the goods, being the BMW car. Section 5 of the Consumer Protection Act lists the situations in which this Act will apply. Section 5(2)(d) is of particular interest to Mr Black as it excludes credit agreements which are regulated by the National Credit Act. However, the goods or services provided in terms of the credit agreement are included and will be regulated by the Consumer Protection Act, whereas credit agreements as contemplated in the National Credit Act, specifically section 8(4)(c), includes hire purchase agreements (instalment agreements) in the ambit of the National Credit Act.

Mr Black’s situation illustrates the position as stated in Article 5(2)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act. The implication of this section is that all credit agreements that are subject to the National Credit Act will be governed by the National Credit Act, but the goods and services in terms of the agreement will fall within the scope of the Consumer Protection Act. It is here that the above acts overlap with each other. The overlap actually lies in that both acts can apply to one agreement. The credit agreement must comply with the National Credit Act, but the goods and services must comply with the Consumer Protection Act. If there is a defect in the quality of the goods or the service the Consumer Protection Act will provide the appropriate remedy, but if it is about the credit agreement itself, then the National Credit Act will apply.

Section 2(9) of the Consumer Protection Act deals with the interpretation of the Act and more specifically on how the law has to be interpreted in cases where there are discrepancies between the Consumer Protection Act and any other law. The Consumer Protection Act should be read in harmony with other legislation as far as possible, but if it is not possible, then the law that offers the most protection to the consumer shall apply.

The two sections in the National Credit Act which deals with the early settlement of credit agreements are sections 122 and 125 of the Act. According to section 122 of the National Credit Act, a consumer may terminate the credit agreement at any time. The consumer can do this by paying the settlement amount as calculated in accordance with section 125 of the National Credit Act.

Section 125 states that a consumer is entitled to cancel a credit agreement at any time with or without prior notice to the credit provider. The settlement amount will be the sum of the following amounts:

  • The outstanding balance of the principal debt / capital amount.
  • All rates and charges up to and including the settlement date. For example, if the outstanding amount can be settled after 3 months, then 3 months’ interest would be charged. The interest will be calculated on the principal amount borrowed.

In the case of a large credit agreement (R250 000.00 or more) the outstanding amount will be calculated as above, but with additional interest, known as an early settlement fee. The fee may not exceed an amount equal to three months’ interest on the capital amount.

Conclusion:
Therefore, if the BMW that Mr Black bought was worth more than R250 000.00 the credit provider will be entitled to charge a penalty fee of not more than 3 months’ interest on the capital amount. In the event that the purchased item’s worth is less than R250 000.00 the credit provider will not be entitled to charge a penalty fee.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.

Uncategorized

DON’T SPEED THROUGH LIFE

A3Jack Louw was used to driving fast cars – he was practically born with one foot on the accelerator. Jack was also born into a very rich family, which meant there was always money to pay for the fines he kept receiving for exceeding the speed limit. However, Jack’s luck would soon change and he might end up with more than a fine.

According to the National Road Traffic Act 93 of 1996 and the Regulations published on 17 March 2000, the general speed limits are: 60 km/h on a public road within an urban area; 100 km/h on a public road outside an urban area which is not a freeway, and 120 km/h on every freeway.

Prosecution or the imposition of a spot fine is automatic if you are caught exceeding the 60km/h and general speed limits. However, if you speed in a 60km/h zone, and it is greater than 100km/h, you will not have the option of paying an admission-of-guilt fine, but will have to appear in court to answer a charge of reckless or dangerous driving and contravention of the Act.

Depending on the seriousness of the offence, you may or may not be given the alternative of an admission-of-guilt fine as opposed to having to appear in Court. An admission-of-guilt fine is a fine that a person is issued with after admitting guilt. It may seem like an easy exit to all problems. However, once admitting guilt, the person will have a criminal record.

Admission-of-guilt fines for speeding are calculated on the basis of rands per km/h in excess of the speed limit. These fines may be paid at any office of the South African Police Service in the Magisterial district where the offence occurred, by the date stipulated on the notice that will be posted to you within two weeks after you received the ticket. You must produce the ticket when paying the fine.

Should you choose not to pay the admission-of-guilt fine, but rather state your case in court, you should check the fine to ascertain the date on which you must appear in Court and the case number. Queries about the fine must be directed to the clerk of the criminal court of the Magisterial district of issue, and the actual document must accompany your query.

It is important to take notice of the speed you are driving. It may be important for you to get to your destination in time, but is it worth paying a fine, or having a criminal record? It is also important to remember that if you get a fine in a town other than your home town, you will have to travel back to that town to appear in court.

Think before admitting guilt to a speeding offence, or even better, think twice before committing an offence that would put you in that position.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.

Commercial

REVIEW OF DIRECTORS’ DECISIONS

A2In the previous article regarding “informal” decisions by directors, we considered what acts or decisions may be considered as informal decisions by directors. The precedents established by the courts were discussed, which precedents are considered regarding the enforceability of these “consents” and the validity of informal decisions by directors. Directors of homeowners’ associations have been forewarned to be diligent and carefully choose their words in conversations with other members, especially when these members paint pictures of proposed building projects. And more specifically, directors are to keep their opinion for the debate of the properly tabled application, especially concerning additions and alterations to the property of the member. The rules of the homeowners’ association regarding aesthetics and other such requirements should be paramount in the decision-making process.

But what if the member did comply with the prescribed formal requirements and the board of directors did not approve the request? Where does that leave the directors and the member?

The courts will not interfere with the decision made by a homeowners’ association save on recognised grounds of judicial review as applied to voluntary associations whose members have bound themselves to its rules, which include the conferring of decision–making functions of elected body of directors (Turner vs Jockey Club of South Africa 1974 (3) SA; SA Medical & Dental Council vs McLoughlin 1948 (2) SA 355 (AD) and Marlin vs Durban Turf Club & Others 1942 AD 112).

The grounds of judicial review are restricted to whether the tribunal was competent to make the decision and whether it complied with the requirements of procedural and substantive fairness which effectively is limited to whether the procedure or decision taken was tainted by irregularity or illegality – unfairness per se is not enough (Bel Porto School Governing Body & Others vs Premier, Western Cape & Another 2002 (3) SA).

The traditional common law grounds of review of a voluntary association tribunal include illegality, procedural unfairness and irrationality. Prior to the constitutional dispensation, the ambit of the voluntary associations had been settled in case law. The Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA) applies to administrative action on the part of an organ of state or a juristic person exercising a public power or performing a public function. Accordingly, directors of homeowners’ associations do not fall within the scope of the PAJA. Section 39(2) of the Constitution on the other hand, requires a court, when developing the common law, to promote the spirit, purport and objectives of the Bill of Rights.

The judgement in the matter of Theron and Andere vs Ring van Wellington van die NG Sending Kerk in Suid-Afrika en Andere 1976 (2) SA 1 (A) has already confirmed that a reasonableness test based on rationality was a competent basis under the common law powers to review decisions of voluntary associations. The court will therefore consider a ground of review that included unreasonableness in the sense that the decision could not reasonably be supported by evidence. There appears to be no difference in principle for present purposes between common law grounds of review in relation to voluntary associations and the grounds of review provided for by PAJA.

Various case laws confirm that a court will only interfere with the decision of the directors of a homeowners’ association where that body has failed to comply with the natural justice requirements of legality, procedural fairness and reasonableness, the latter in the sense of a rational connection existing between the facts presented and the considerations that were applied in reaching the conclusion.

If the Memorandum of Incorporation or rules of the homeowners’ association prescribe a formal procedure to follow for permission or consent to be obtained regarding any alteration or other building projects, any member who did not submit a formal request for the building project, even if it is only the erection of a fence and did not include the detail of the fence to be erected for approval prior to the erection thereof, then the fence is “illegal”.

The board of directors of any homeowners’ association has an obligation to enforce the Memorandum of Association and/or the Memorandum of Incorporation and the rules of the association, and should do so in the interests of the whole of the estate and all its members.

Any building project which has been embarked on or even finished without proper procedures followed by the homeowner, and which does not comply with the aesthetical requirements of the homeowners’ association as is prescribed in the rules, are “illegal” in that the member erected the building without formally complying with the requirements of the homeowners’ association. Directors should carefully consider each and every such building project within the jurisdiction of the association and, in the best interest of all members of the association, invite such members affected for an informal, amicable discussion regarding the removal or further alteration of the building or building project, even if it is only a fence and the time periods to do so. It is important to note that such members should still be obliged to comply with the formal requirements as prescribed by the association. These applications can be tabled in terms of the formal procedures prescribed with consideration to formally consent thereto retrospectively by the board of directors on condition that all prescriptive requirements have been fully met, even if it is merely aesthetically.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.