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 17 – 2022


Highflyer Properties (Pty) Ltd v Franchkings (Pty) Ltd (40462/2019) [2022] ZAGPJHC 612 (29 August 2022)

The answer is yes and no, it depends. The court here had to determine which of the landlord or tenant repudiated the lease. This after a heated altercation during which the tenant complained about defects and the landlord said words to the effect that the tenant must move in or find another place to rent. The tenant later alleged that the landlord had, by that conduct, repudiated the lease. The landlord disagreed and stated that it was an unfortunate argument about defects. The Court explained here that repudiation can occur by conduct, but the measure is not necessarily what the other party subjectively perceived, but what a reasonable man would have deducted. Considering the facts of this matter, a reasonable man would not have thought that the landlord had repudiated. The tenant was accordingly held liable for the landlord’s damages. The judgment is a great illustration of how these principles apply practically.

The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment


Morewane N.O. v Rampoto N.O. and Others (2020/8534) [2022] ZAGPJHC 625 (29 August 2022)

An interesting point arose for adjudication in this matter, namely whether a donation inter vivos of property is valid if the person making the donation is not the owner of the land donated. Here a person enjoying tenure rights donated property in terms of a written deed of donation. Only later did the donor become the registered owner of the property. The court held that such a donation was valid. The judgment illustrates the considerations.

The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment

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