Maryna holds the BA, LLB, LLM degrees and is a Director at the Cape Town offices of STBB. She is an admitted Attorney, Notary Public and Conveyancer with many years of experience in the field of property law and conveyancing. She is also the firm's Marketing Director and attends to external publications for the firm as well as conducts ongoing training for estate agent and bankers training and is a regular seminar presenter for attorneys and property practitioners.

Property Law Update | Issue 08 – 2020

ONE MESSY TRIO: SELLER’S SARS WOES; DOUBLE SALE; 1ST PURCHASER REFUSING TO VACATE
Narainsamy and Others v Nel and Another (15281/2014) [2020] ZAKZPHC 5 (28 February 2020)

Living in an upmarket unit in central Cape Town almost for free for approximately six years due to the seller’s inability to procure SARS clearance for the transfer, this judgment deals with the purchaser’s resistance to an eviction when the property was subsequently sold and transferred to a third party. It illustrates the position in our law, especially in circumstances where the second purchaser had some knowledge of the existing issues with SARS.
The Judgment can be viewed here.

The Judgment
Summary of the Jugdment

SURETY BINDS HIMSELF AS CO-PRINCIPAL DEBTOR: DOES HE BECOME A CO-DEBTOR?
Liberty Group Ltd v Illman (1334/2018) [2020] ZASCA 38 (16 April 2020)

A suretyship document often dictates that the surety binds himself as “surety and co-principal debtor in solidum” with the principal debtor. Could this mean that the surety becomes a co-debtor to the principal debt? And if so, as summons on one co-debtor interrupts prescription in respect all co-debtors, then surely summons on the surety as “co-debtor” would interrupt the running of prescription in respect of sureties as well? This judgment clarifies the position in our law and is a worthwhile read.
The Judgment can be viewed here.

The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment