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 – 2024


Setso Property Fund (Pty) Ltd v Manama (2023/0027101) [2024] ZAGPJHC 592 (21 June 2024)

In this rare instance where a seller chose to enforce an agreement against a defaulting purchaser, the seller’s claim for specific performance was challenged by the buyer. The buyer argued that the bank’s Pre-Agreement Statement and Quotation did not constitute approval ‘in principle,’ as stipulated in their agreement. The court noted that the language used by the bank in its documents did indeed constitute such approval. Furthermore, the court noted that the 5-day period for acceptance pertained only to the quotation. The pre-agreement thus remained in place as fulfillment of the suspensive condition.

The judgment and summary below highlight why the court found in favour of the seller.

The judgment can be viewed here
Summary of the Judgment


Pillay and Another v Moonsamy and Another (D6707/21) [2024] ZAKZDHC 35 (5 June 2024)

It is alarming that a dispute between neighbours regarding a relatively negligible encroachment should reach a high court. Nonetheless, the underlying legal principles for assisting an applicant are sound, as the discussion of the law in this judgment reflects. In addition, although a court has the discretion not to order demolition but instead to award payment of compensation or damages, this decision must be supported by cogent argument, failing which demolition will be the outcome.

The judgment and summary below highlight the reasoning of the court.

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