1887

n Journal for Juridical Science - Mortgage bonds and the right of access to adequate housing in South Africa : 2011 (3) SA 608 (CC)

Volume 37, Issue 1
  • ISSN : 0258-252X
USD

 

Abstract

This article offers a critique of 2011 (3) SA 608 (CC), a case in which the Constitutional Court of South Africa found it to be unconstitutional for the registrar of a high court to declare immovable properties specially executable when ordering a default judgement, to the extent that such an order "permitted the sale and execution of a home of a person". The Court interpreted the property clause in section 25, access to right to housing in section 26 of the Constitution, as mandating "further judicial oversight" in all cases where execution is levied against residential property. The article raises some of the shortcomings of this interpretive scheme and suggests that constitutional values, when used to curtail or enlarge obligations of parties to a mortgage bond, must take into account the general rights and duties which the parties assumed at the signing of the agreement; the circumstances of each of the parties at the time of execution and ascertained through a careful evaluation based on a clearly articulated set of principles, and the nature of constitutional rights themselves. The article argues that, whereas there may be circumstances in which a debtor may need protection, rather than impose a blanket abrogation of procedures allowing for expedient disposal of uncontested claims, the court should instead have considered the establishment of further procedural safeguards.


Hierdie artikel kritiseer 2011 (3) SA 608 (CC), 'n saak waarin die Konstitusionele Hof van Suid-Afrika bevind het dat dit ongrondwetlik is vir die griffier van 'n hoë hof om die roerende eiendom spesiaal uitvoerbaar te verklaar wanneer 'n verstekbevel gemaak word, in die mate waartoe so 'n bevel toelaat dat die huis van 'n persoon in eksekusie verkoop kan word. Die Hof het die eiendomsklousule in artikel 25, en die reg op toegang tot geskikte behuising in artikel 26, van die Grondwet interpreteer om verdere geregtelike oorsig te vereis in alle gevalle waar die eksekusie verkope van residensiële eiendom ter sprake is. Hierdie artikel spreek sommige van die tekortkominge van bogenoemde interpretasieskema aan en stel voor dat wanneer grondwetlike waardes gebruik word om die verpligtinge van partye tot 'n verband in te kort of uit te brei, die algemene regte en verpligtinge wat die partye aangeneem het toe hulle die ooreenkoms aangegaan het, die omstandighede van die partye ten tye van die eksekusie soos bepaal deur 'n sorgvuldige evaluasie van duidelik geformuleerde beginsels, en die aard van die grondwetlike regte self in rekening gehou moet word. Die artikel voer verder aan dat terwyl daar omstandighede mag wees waar 'n skuldenaar meer beskerming moet geniet, eerder as om 'n algemene afskaffing van prosedures wat die spoedige afhandeling van onbetwiste eise moontlik maak voor te skryf, die hof dit moes oorweeg het om verdere prosedurele beskermings in plek te stel.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/juridic/37/1/EJC129329
2012-06-01
2016-12-10

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error