TITLE DEEDS WHEN BUYING OR SELLING PROPERTY

If you’re planning to buy a new property, you’ll need to get the title deed transferred into your name to prove that you’re the owner of the property. You’ll need the assistance of a lawyer specialising in property transfers (also known as a conveyancer) to help you transfer the title deed into your name.

You’ll only become the owner of the property when the Registrar of Deeds signs the transfer. After it’s been signed, a copy of the title deed is kept at the Deeds Office closest to you.

How long does it take? 

A search may take 30 to 60 minutes. In some of the larger offices, the copy of a deed is posted or it must be collected after a certain period of time.

To obtain a copy of a deed or document from a deeds registry, you must:

  • Go to any deeds office (deeds registries may not give out information acting on a letter or a telephone call).
  • Go to the information desk, where an official will help you complete a prescribed form and explain the procedure.
  • Request a data typist to do a search on the property, pay the required fee at the cashier’s office and take the receipt back to the official at the information desk.
  • The receipt number will be allocated to your copy of title.

Fortunately, a conveyancer will help you with the process so that you don’t have to worry about all the paperwork yourself. You should contact your legal advisor to find out more.

Reference:

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

AM I STILL PROTECTED WITHOUT AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT?

This article looks at the continued relevancy of the employment contract in legal practice today. In 2014, the legislator amended section 186(1)(a) of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (LRA), which deals with unfair dismissals, by removing the words “contract of” within the definition, leaving only the word “employment”. This gives the idea that the legislator accepts that the employment relationship goes beyond just the employment contract.

On being offered employment, not everyone tends to ask for an employment contract first, yet the employment contract is the first thing everyone turns to when the employment relationship turns sour. It was accepted that the contract of employment is the cornerstone of the employment relationship.  It links the employer and the employee in an employment relationship.

The initial idea was that the contract of employment regulates all aspects of the employment relationship. However, in practice this is not the reality. The employment relationship tends to go beyond just the contract of employment. This is because of statutory intervention, collective contracts, customs, and practices as well as common law implied terms which are often read into the contract. In terms of the section 186(1)(a) of the LRA, the old definition of dismissal was defined as the termination of the employment contract with or without notice. To accommodate the abovementioned factors, the legislator amended the section, expanding the definition of a dismissal to entail more than just the termination of the contract of employment.

This begs the question: do you need to sign an employment contract to be protected by labour legislation in South Africa?

The Labour Relations Amendment Act, 6 of 2014 (LRAA) changed the definition of dismissal in terms of section 186(1)(a) of the LRA. This means that the test for a dismissal will now hinge on whether employment or the employment relationship is terminated. This change from the contract of employment to just employment and/or employment relationship is also noticeable in section 186(1)(e) and (f).

So, what is meant by employment relationship? The contract of employment contains most of the terms and expected duties of both the employer and employee but it seldom happens that it covers the full spectrum of the employment relationship. Some obligations and rights are derived from a variety of sources, including the common law, collective bargaining, statutes, custom and practices, and in some instances, oral contracts between the employer and the employee. Other factors which may be taken into account, such as the employee’s obedience, care, economic dependency between the parties, fidelity, and the employer’s duty of care towards the employee, are not often referred to in the contract of employment. Initially, when employees entered into the contract, these rights and obligations may not have seemed as important but may have later turned out to be the core of a dispute. Therefore, there was a need for the concept to go beyond that of just the contract of employment, as it needed to cover the full scope of the practical realities of the workplace.

The world of work has changed over the years and employers always try to bypass labour legislation, which means that working arrangements may go beyond the employment contract and the protection provided for in labour legislation should also adapt. In Denel (Pty) Ltd v Gerber 2005 9 BLLR 849 (LAC) the court held: “In this regard it is important to bear in mind that a contract between any two persons may represent form and not substance or may not reflect the realities of a relationship…”

In State Information Technology Agency (SITA) (Pty) Ltd v CCMA & others 2008 7 BLLR 611 (LAC) the Labour Appeal Court also used the “reality test” to determine an employment relationship. In WL Ochse Webb & Pretorius (Pty) Ltd v Vermeulen 1997 18 ILJ (SA) 361 (LAC) the court highlighted that neither the employer nor employee benefit from the employment contract when it is “cast in stone”.

The legislator has now shifted the focus to the abstract relationship between the employer and employee, rather than just focusing on the contract between them. This amendment changes the entire idea we had about the employment relationship, even expanding the protection offered by labour legislation.

Reference List:

  • AC Basson, MA Christinason, A Dekker, C Garbers, PAK Le Roux, C Mischke & EML Strydom Essential Labour  Law 5 ed (2009).
  • A van Niekerk, MA Christianson, M McGregor & BPS Van Eck Law@Work 3 ed (2015).
  • A Rycroft & B Jordaan A Guide to South African Labour Law 2 ed (1992).
  • JAM Coyle-Shapiro, LM Shore, MS Taylor & LE Tetrick The Employment Relationship: Examining Psychlogical and Contextual Perspectives (2004).
  • Denel (Pty) Ltd v Gerber 2005 9 BLLR 849 (LAC).
  • State Information Technology Agency (SITA) (Pty) Ltd v CCMA & others 2008 7 BLLR 611 (LAC).
  • WL Ochse Webb & Pretorius (Pty) Ltd v Vermeulen 1997 18 ILJ (SA) 361 (LAC).

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

THE COMPULSORY ROTATION OF AUDITORS

Every public and state-owned company has to appoint an auditor and a company secretary.  However, in terms of section 92 of the Companies Act, 2008, the same individual is not allowed to serve as the auditor or designated auditor of a company for more than 5 consecutive financial years.

What does this mean for my company?

  • If an individual has served as the auditor or designated auditor of your company for 2 or more consecutive financial years, and then ceases the position, the individual may not be appointed again as the auditor or designated auditor of the company until after the expiry of at least two further financial years.
  • If your company has appointed 2 or more persons as joint auditors, you must manage the required rotation in a way that all of the joint auditors do not relinquish office in the same year.

Despite the strict requirements for public and state-owned companies, it is not compulsory for private or personal liability companies to appoint an auditor, unless the company is required to produce audited financial statements.

Is this for the better?

It is understood that the external audit function is an activity of public protection and provides credibility to financial statements and assurance to investors. However, auditor rotation could lead to additional costs to companies, as the new auditor would be required to perform additional procedures on the opening balances of their new client.

In some areas, it could also impact negatively on the availability of auditors, as some towns only have a limited number of registered auditors. Auditors practicing as sole practitioners will also be affected, and could lose long-term clients unless they bring in another registered auditor and expand their practice.

References:

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

SARS TO INTENSIFY ACTION AGAINST TAX OFFENDERS

Despite the fact that SARS has upheld their philosophy of education, service, and thereafter enforcement, they have noticed an increase in taxpayers not submitting their tax returns by the stipulated deadlines, and not settling their outstanding debt with SARS. This is not limited to the current tax year but includes substantial non-compliance across previous tax years.

It is for this reason that from October 2017 SARS will intensify criminal proceedings against tax offenders. Failure to submit the return(s) within the said period could result in:

  • Administrative penalties being imposed on a monthly basis per outstanding return.
  • Criminal prosecution resulting in imprisonment or a fine for each day that such default continues.

Types of tax

SARS has reminded all taxpayers that, according to the Tax Administration Act No. 28 of 2011, it is a criminal offence not to submit a tax return for any of the tax types they are registered. These tax types are:

  • Personal Income Tax (PIT)
  • Corporate Income Tax (CIT)
  • Pay as You Earn (PAYE)
  • Value Added Tax (VAT)

It is also important to note that should any return result in a tax debt it must be paid before the relevant due date to avoid any interest for late payment and legal action. To avoid any penalties, interest, prosecutions as well as imprisonment, taxpayers are urged to rectify their compliance by submitting any outstanding returns as soon as possible. Please contact your tax advisor for assistance.

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. (E&OE)

PLANNING YOUR ESTATE AS NEWLYWEDS

For newlyweds, one of the most important tasks to attend to is estate planning. The estate planning will depend on what the couple wants and what form of marriage they are in. It is therefore important to keep the following in mind when planning the years ahead together.

Marriage in community of property

There is a joint estate, with each spouse having a 50 percent share in each and every asset in the estate (no matter in whose name it is registered);

  1. In the event of the death of one spouse, the surviving spouse will have a claim for 50 percent of the value of the combined estate. The estate is divided after all the debts have been settled in a deceased estate.
  2. When drafting a Last Will and Testament, spouses married in community of property need to be aware that it is only half of any asset that he or she is able to bequeath.
  3. Upon the death of one spouse, all banking accounts are frozen (even if they are in the name of one of the spouses), which could affect liquidity.

Marriage out of community of property without the accrual system

Each estate planner (spouse) retains possession of assets owned prior to the marriage. Each spouse’s estate is completely separated, even in the event of death. If you want your spouse to inherit something, you would need to outline this in your Will.

Marriage out of community of property with the accrual system

This is identical to a “marriage out of community of property” but the accrual system will be applicable. The accrual system is a formula that is used to calculate how much the larger estate must pay the smaller estate once the marriage comes to an end through death or divorce.

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. (E&OE)

MUNICIPAL DEBT INVALID, THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT HAS RULED

On 23 May 2017, the Constitutional Court heard an application for confirmation of an order of the High Court of South Africa, that declared section 118(3) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 2000, constitutionally invalid.

On 29 August, in a ruling majority written by Justice Edwin Cameron, the court found that upon transfer of a property, a new owner is not liable for old municipal debt.

Section 118 of the Municipal Systems Act

Section 118(3) explains that municipal debt on any property is a charge upon that property and enjoys preference over any mortgage bond registered against the property. However, the question was whether this means that, when a new owner buys the property, the property remains with the debts of a previous owner.

What did the court say?

The court ruled that section 118 (3) is “well capable of being interpreted”, so that the historical debt is not transferred to a new owner of the property.

“What is notable about section 118(3) is that the legislature did not require that the charge (historical debt) be either registered or noted on the register of deeds. Textually, there is no indication that the right given to municipalities has a third-party effect (to a new owner)… It (historical debt) stands alone, isolated and unsupported, without foundation or undergirding and with no express words carrying any suggestion that it is transmissible,” the court said in the judgement.

References:

  • The Constitutional Court of South Africa
  • “Concourt rules new homeowners not liable for debts of previous owners”, Ray Mahlaka, The Citizen, 29 August 2017. https://citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/1631149/concourt-rules-new-homeowners-not-liable-for-debts-of-previous-owners/
  • Jordaan and Another v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others; New Ventures Consulting & Services (Pty) Ltd and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another; Livanos and Others v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Another; Oak Plant Rentals (Pty) Ltd and Others v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (74195/2013; 13039/2014; 13040/2014; 19552/2015; 23826/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 941; [2017] 1 All SA 585 (GP); 2017 (2) SA 295 (GP) (7 November 2016)
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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

IMMEDIATE STEPS FOLLOWING THE DEATH OF A LOVED ONE

The death of a loved one is a difficult process to go through, and when the inevitable occurs, it is important to remember what happens next. The cause of death is determined under 2 categories: natural death, such as illness or heart attack, and unnatural death, such as a suicide or an accident.

Natural or unnatural death

If the deceased has passed in their home, and cause of death is suspicious, the family is required to contact the South African Police Service (SAPS) to conduct an immediate investigation before contacting the mortuary. In the event where death is natural, the family is required to contact medical professionals to determine the nature of the death, and sign certification of the cause of death.

Death certificate

A prescribed certificate may be issued by the medical practitioner if the death is ruled as natural, either following a period of illness, or a medical examination. Should it be suspected that the death is unnatural, the certificate may only be issued to the concerned police officer after an investigation where the corpse is no longer required for further examination.

An autopsy is not deemed necessary should the death be ruled as natural.

Registration of death may take be done the following places:

  • Department of Home Affairs
  • SAPS, if there are no Home Affairs offices available
  • South African Embassy or Consulate, should the death have occurred abroad
  • Registered funeral undertakers

An abridged death certificate is issued on the same day of registration, free of charge.

References

  • Births and Deaths Registration Act 51 of 1992. (2017). [PDF] Cape Town: Government Gazette. Available at: http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/a51_1992.pdf [Accessed 31 Jul. 2017].
  • Dha.gov.za. (2017). Department of Home Affairs – Death Certificates. [online] Available at: http://www.dha.gov.za/index.php/death-certificates1 [Accessed 31 Jul. 2017].
  • Grange, H. (2017). What to do when someone dies | IOL. [online] Iol.co.za. Available at: http://www.iol.co.za/the-star/what-to-do-when-someone-dies-1810336 [Accessed 31 Jul. 2017].
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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

CAN BREAKING-OFF AN ENGAGEMENT PROMPT LEGAL ACTION?

Once a couple has become engaged, you could say that they have concluded a verbal contract to get married. From that point, up until the marriage, the couple would be committed to getting married, as well as the planning and preparation leading up to it. However, in some instances, one of those in the relationship might decide to break off the engagement. This might seem unimportant, but what if the couple had gone to great lengths to plan the wedding and even went as far as changing lifestyles in the expectation of getting married. Would the person being left behind be able to sue for damages lost?

Does our law mention engagement?

Our common law has, over the years, recognised the principle that the aggrieved party has a claim for breach of promise. Traditionally this claim comprises two parts, namely:

  1. The delictual claim which the aggrieved party would have under the action injuriarum for contumelia, in other words, damages for the humiliation caused as a result of the break-up of the relationship; and
  1. The contractual claim for the actual financial loss suffered by the aggrieved party as a result of the break-up of the relationship of the parties.

In the Supreme Court of Appeal case Van Jaarsveld vs Bridges (2010), it was found that no claim in South African law exists other than actual expenses incurred in the planning and preparation of the marriage.

The judgement draws attention to a court’s right and more importantly, duty to develop the common law, taking into account the interests of justice and at the same time to promote the spirit of the Bill of Rights.

ES Cloete vs A Maritz (2013) WCH

The question whether or not the claim for breach of promise is a valid cause of action in South African law was once again considered in the Western Cape High Court. In this Court, Judge Robert Henney was the presiding Judge in the matter of ES Cloete vs A Maritz.

Miss Cloete claimed that Mr Maritz proposed formally to her in Namibia on the 9th February 1999 with an engagement ring, and she accepted. The relationship was turbulent and a decade later Maritz called off the engagement and the intended wedding. Cloete instituted action against Maritz and alleged that Maritz’s refusal to marry her amounted to a repudiation of the agreement which they had reached 10 years earlier. In his judgment, Judge R Henney said: “Clearly, to hold a party accountable on a rigid contractual footing, where such a party fails to abide by a promise to marry does not reflect the changed mores, morals or public interest of today.”

The judge also said: “As pointed out by Sinclair, The Law of Marriage Vol 1 (1996), to hold a party liable for contractual damages for breach of promise may in fact lead parties to enter into marriages they do not in good conscience want to enter into, purely due to the fear of being faced with such a claim.”

Conclusion

Divorce, which in earlier days was only available in the event of adultery or desertion, is now available in the event of an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. There is no reason why a just cause for ending an engagement should not likewise include the lack of desire to marry the particular person, irrespective of the ‘guilt’ of the latter.

Note to attorneys

  • See Cloete vs Maritz (6222/2010) [2013] ZAWCHC 69 (24 April 2013);
  • Van Jaarsveld vs Bridges (344/09) [2010] ZASCA 76; 2010 (4) SA 558 (SCA); [2010] 4 All SA 389 (SCA) (27 May 2010).

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

HOW TO EVICT AN ILLEGAL TENANT

Landlords who have tenants that they believe are occupying their premises illegally may not forcefully remove such tenants. The Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (No. 19 of 1998) provides for the prohibition of unlawful eviction and also provides proper procedures for the eviction of unlawful occupiers.

According to the Act:

l no one may be deprived of property except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property;

l no one may be evicted from their home, or have their home demolished without an order of court made after considering all the relevant circumstances;

l it is desirable that the law should regulate the eviction of unlawful occupiers from land in a fair manner, while recognising the right of land owners to apply to a court for an eviction order in appropriate circumstances;

l special consideration should be given to the rights of the elderly, children, disabled persons and particularly households headed by women, and that it should be recognised that the needs of those groups should be considered;

Procedure regarding evictions in terms of the PIE Act:

  1. According to the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), to cancel a fixed-term lease you must give the tenant at least 20 business days’ notice to rectify a material breach of the lease, failing which the lease will be cancelled.
  2. After 21 days, you can send the tenant a letter to cancel the lease. The letter should state that the tenant is now deemed to be occupying the property unlawfully and that he or she must vacate the premises by a specific date.
  3. If the tenant/occupier has not left the premises by the date mentioned in the letter of cancellation, then your lawyer can lodge an eviction application, which includes seeking the court’s permission to serve a notice of motion on the occupier.

References:

  • Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (No. 19 of 1998), South Africa
  • “How to evict a tenant (lawfully)”, Mark Bechard, Personal Finance, IOL. https://www.iol.co.za/personal-finance/how-to-evict-a-tenant-lawfully-2059984

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)

DETERMINING THE GROUNDS FOR INFORMED CONSENT

If a person gives consent without acknowledging, understanding and considering their rights beforehand, is their consent legal and permissible in court? In eviction proceedings, it is questioned whether the granted eviction order may be cancelled after the unlawful occupiers had allegedly consented to it.

Occupiers of erven 87 & 88 Berea v Christiaan Frederick De Wet N.O.

A block of flats, Kiribilly, situated on erven 87 and 88 in Johannesburg was unlawfully occupied by 184 residents consisting of low income earners and unemployed occupiers, where some occupied the residence for a period of 26 years.

The said property was purchased from M L Rocchi, whose attorneys served the unlawful occupiers a letter notifying them of the termination of their right of occupation. The occupiers approached Mr Ngubane to speak on their behalf, and he confirmed with the court that the matter had been settled, as the respondents had been informed.

The High Court granted an order, which was allegedly agreed upon by both parties, to have the occupiers evicted from the property. The question is whether the order is bona fide based on the nature of the consent.

Legislation

Contesting the order’s legal validity, the applicants submitted that, even if the consent was legally valid, the Court was under constitutional and statutory duties to provide that the eviction would be just and equitable.

Respondents submitted that the applicants failed to provide a defence as to the entitlement of remaining in occupation of the property, thus making the order just and equitable, as stipulated by Section 4(8) of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which says, “If the court is satisfied…that no valid defence has been raised by the unlawful occupier[s], it must grant an order.”

Validity of eviction order based on consent

For consent to be legally effective, it must have been given by the applicants freely and voluntarily with the full awareness of the rights being disregarded. Given that the applicants were not aware of their rights, the factual consent that they allegedly gave was uninformed, therefore not legally binding. Because all information with regards to the conditions of the occupiers was not presented to the courts, the consideration of all relevant factors is disabled, rendering the order invalid. Above all, no information was given as to where the unlawful occupiers would go after the eviction.

Conclusion

In a matter where there is a person claiming to speak on behalf of illegal occupiers in a court appearance, any agreement that s/he has made is not binding to the occupiers because s/he is not the legal representative, nor an occupier. Any statements he makes in court are legally inconsequential, and thus nullified as giving informed or legal consent.

Reference:

  • Occupiers of erven 87 & 88 Berea v Christiaan Frederick De Wet N.O. [2017] ZACC 18

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. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)