Maryna holds the BA, LLB, LLM degrees and is a Director at the Cape Town branch of STBB. She is an admitted Attorney, Notary Public, Conveyancer and Insolvency Practitioner with many years of experience in the fields of property law, conveyancing and the laws relating to corporate compliance (especially in respect of the FICA and POPIA laws). Up until 2018 she was also head of the firm’s national marketing portfolio. She is a seasoned public speaker and presenter, both in person and online. She prepares text for the majority of STBB’s internal and external publications and is editor and co-writer for two pivotal publications in the South African real estate industry – the ABC of Conveyancing (JUTA) and Delport’s South African Property Law and Practice (JUTA).

Property Law Update | Issue 12 – 2024


SB Guarantee Company (Pty) Ltd v De Sousa (2023/035447) [2024] ZAGPJHC 459 (6 May 2024)

When a financial institution makes application to court to declare a person’s home specially executable, submission of a reliable property valuation is crucially important. It enables the court to determine whether a reserve price should be set and, if so, the amount thereof. Given that a debtor in these circumstances is unlikely to have funds to procure their own valuation, they must also be able to rely on the expert valuation.

In these three matters, the court refused to use the professional valuations provided by widely-used valuation companies after establishing that the methods employed in providing professional valuations on affidavit rendered these affidavits unreliable. Without a dependable valuation, the court could not make a finding.

It is an exceptionally important judgment and likely to be noted by all courts across the country.

The judgment can be viewed here
Summary of the Judgment


Property Knight (Pty) Ltd v van Niekerk and Others (A220/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 30 (7 February 2024)

This judgment is another warning against the dangers of intern agents not acting under the supervision of their principals, and the pitfalls that arise in the absence of records regarding the details of a mandate. The claim for commission in this matter failed because the agency, claiming that their intern was the effective cause of the sale, did not take account of the recordal regarding payment of the commission in the seller and buyer’s sale agreement. In addition, the intern was reported to the PPRA for apparent failure to adhere to the requirements regarding his status as intern and his Fidelity Fund Certificate.

The Judgment can be viewed here
Summary of the Judgment

For the best legal advice and personalised service, let's talk
Subscribe to our monthly newsletters, subscribe