A Gauteng couple has been ordered to pay their landlord with over R440,000 after they continued to live at a Malanshof property in Randburg without paying rent.

The ruling was recently made by the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg after the landlord sought relief against the occupants, Albertina Tshisikule and Tshipuliso Barnabas Tshisikule.

The duo started living at the property in July 2009 and the lease agreement was renewed in writing on several occasions, the final renewal ended in July 2016.

After the lease expired, the couple remained in occupation with the landlord’s tacit consent, continuing to make rental payments.

The landlord argued that despite the non-renewal of lease agreement, he was covered by Section 5(5) of the Rental Housing Act which states that if on the expiration of the lease the tenant remains in the dwelling with the tacit consent of the landlord, the parties are deemed, in the absence of a further written lease, to have entered into a periodic lease, on the same terms and conditions as the expired lease.

The landlord submitted that the old lease continued to govern the couple’s stay until it was cancelled in May 2022 following persistent non-payment. The couple, nonetheless, remained in occupation until the end of October 2023.

Furthermore, the landlord argued that by living at the property without paying, the duo owed over R130,000 in rental and over R310, 000 in holding-over damages.

The couple opposed the application, arguing that there was no contractual relationship after the lease agreement ended in 2016. Furthermore, they claimed that there was an oral agreement made in 2021 which allowed them to remain in the property without paying rent. 

However, Judge Leonie Windell said the couple’s argument was flawed as it overlooked Section 5(5) of the Rental Housing Act.

Regarding the oral agreement, judge Windell said the law requires a party relying on an oral agreement to set out the date, place, and identity of the people who concluded it and none of these particulars were disclosed by the couple. Therefore, their pleading falls short at the threshold level.

The judge also found it improbable that the landlord would have instituted and pursued eviction proceedings if it had indeed agreed that the couple could remain rent-free.

“None of the defendants’ defences meet the threshold for resisting summary judgment…on the other hand, the landlord has established its claims for arrear rental and holding-over damages on the papers,” said the judge.

Judge Windell ordered the couple to pay the money with two percent interest calculated from October 2023 until final payment.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL News

Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now.

Source link