[29] In the founding egg, to which Mr. Douwter`s brother, Mr. Douw A Hurter, designed, was annexed the so-called lease, which is joined by the applicants` association council as Schedule SN 28, registration at p. 187. (k) that on August 12, 2009, the opponent of the first resort occupied the land (and not as stipulated in the alleged lease agreement of July 22, 2010) and remains in The Guarantee (it seems however that at that time the property was still registered in the name of the seller and inhabited by the seller). (a) whether Mr. Khoza returned the agreement to him after the installation in the building; or [31] Although this inclusion in the foundation declaration was referred to, the First Respondent did not explain how, why and by whom the word had been inserted into the agreement. [47] I am therefore satisfied that no lease agreement was duly entered into between the second respondent and the first response. 2.Am December 18, 2014, the First Defendant and the First Defendant entered into a 36-month contract (SLA). This agreement followed the appointment on 03 November 2014 of the first applicant as „professional consulting engineer for the planning, design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of various departmental infrastructure projects“.
On the basis of ALS, the projects were awarded to the first complainant as an Engineering Contractor for the first defendant. (b) that Ms. De Jager was informed that the respective sales contracts would be signed by the mpumalanga Commissioner in charge of regional receivables and the lease after the transfer of the real estate to the second respondent; [39] He may (and is not) to dispute that Mr. Khoza, whose identity was no longer admitted to the signing of leases on behalf of the second respondent, according to the version of the first appeal under the version of the first appeal, was established (and is not). [20] The applicants dispute, as they manifest themselves both in their creation and in their sworn assurances, that any lease, as invoked by First Respondent, was ever entered into between first Respondent in and Second Respondent. [17] Nach Ansicht der First Respondent, die Kaufvertr-ge jedoch am 21. The second respondent, Henriq 2617 (Pty) Ltd and Martiens Landgoed (Pty) Ltd, will separately enter into leases in which the second respondent leases the property to Henriq 2617 (Pty) Ltd and its candidate (or their candidate) for a period of five years. [43] Second, I cannot understand why Mrs De Jager, who must have noticed that the so-called agreement was not signed in the space provided for the lessor, must have acknowledged that there are doubts as to whether or not the agreement will be signed on behalf of the second party. I was referred to a decision (Chisnall and Chisnall/Sturgeon and Sturgeon, 1993 (2) SA 642 (W)) relating to agreements, The main terms of the contract to purchase the land (Annex C2, registration p. 303) were finally signed on May 12, 2009 (i) that he contacted them a few days later, as he had heard nothing of it and requested a copy.
the draft lease, which will then be faxed to him. (c) that after the conclusion of the sales contracts, Ms. De Jager attended a meeting (according to information provided by First Respondent on May 11, 2009) with Ms. Leona Archery, then Provincial Director of the Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform, as she is the duly authorized person to enter into leases in order to obtain assurance that the leases [54] actually occurred on the day in question, in the sense that Mr. Khoza transferred the agreement to another location in the building and that with the agreement as it appears in Appendix SN 14, he returned and handed it over to him, or that she gave it to him after he told him that it had been duly signed and faxed at a later date.
Neueste Kommentare