PVL3701 PORTFOLIO MEMO - MAY/JUNE 2023 - SEMESTER 1 - UNISA (DETAILED MEMO - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED)

PVL3701 PORTFOLIO MEMO - MAY/JUNE 2023 - SEMESTER 1 - UNISA (DETAILED MEMO - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED) Question 1 Mr Nkosi, a retired attorney, rents a residential property in Sandton. Mr Nkosi’s neighbours, the Van Vuurens, own the house next to the house that he is occupying. The Van Vuurens have three sons (Jan, Piet and Koos) who are Unisa students. Jan is a law student and often discusses his Unisa law modules with Mr Nkosi. Jan, Piet and Koos enjoy spending time in the garden with their friends. They also regularly braai over the weekends. Their parents often go away for long periods and leave their sons at home. During these periods the three sons are very noisy. Mr Nkosi approaches Jan, Piet and Koos’s parents to discuss the matter. The parents are very embarrassed to hear about the behaviour of their three sons. They thank Mr Nkosi for informing them. They also apologise for the behaviour of their children. Although the Van Vuurens have a good relationship with Mr Nkosi, Mrs Van Vuuren is concerned that Mr Nkosi (being a retired attorney) might institute legal action against them. Jan informs Mrs Van Vuuren that Mr Nkosi could institute legal action against them. Unsure about the way forward, Mr Van Vuuren suggests that Jan, the law student, should be involved in solving the matter. Piet and Koos who are both studying psychology do not understand why their neighbour is complaining. They feel that since they live in a house that belongs to their parents, they should be able to do as they please. Piet and Koos also feel that Mr Nkosi is not always the perfect neighbour since his grandchildren once kicked a rugby ball over the boundary wall and broke a window. Jan, on the other hand, is currently registered for the Property law module at Unisa and is excited to explain to his two brothers and his parents how to approach the situation. He approaches you to discuss some of the questions. Against this background, advise Jan and answer the following questions: 1.1 Evaluate the opinion of Piet and Koos, namely that they should be allowed to do as they please since the house belongs to their parents. [5] [Your answer should not exceed 10 lines.] 1.2 What legal action can Mr Nkosi institute against the Van Vuurens? Will he succeed and what will the general approach of a court be in a situation such as this? [8] [Your answer should not exceed 16 lines.] 1.2 Jan, Piet and Koos decide to change their behaviour and apologise to Mr Nkosi. Mr Nkosi is overjoyed because he wants to buy the property that he is currently renting. Mr Nkosi contacted the owners, and they are willing to sell the property. He invites Jan over to discuss how he could acquire ownership of the property. Jan explains that since Mr Nkosi is already in control of the house, the short- handed method of delivery would apply. Mr Nkosi asks Jan to discuss this advice with his friends. Evaluate Jan’s advice to Mr Nkosi and fully explain how Mr Nkosi will become the owner of the property. (8) [Your answer should not exceed 16 lines.] Question 1 total: [21] Question 2 Karen owns a hotel, “Ubuhle”, in Cape Town. She bought three new fridges for the kitchen from Cheap Deal Wholesale, in terms of a credit agreement. Cheap Deal Wholesale reserved ownership of the fridges until the final instalment has been paid. Karen also owes SA Bank R 500 000. The debt is secured in terms of a mortgage registered over the hotel. A guest of the hotel, Marianne, accidentally packed a towel that looked like her own, in her suitcase, thinking that it is hers before she leaves the hotel. One of Ubuhle’s chefs, Ronald, asked Karen whether he could rent one of the small rooms in the hotel for a period of six months. Karen agreed and they sign a lease agreement. Ronald also wanted to borrow R 5000 from Karen. They agreed that Ronald would pledge his cell phone as security. Karen paid the agreed amount into Ronald’s bank account, but Ronald and Karen agreed that it won’t make sense for him to give the cell phone to her. Karen told Ronald that she trusted him and believe that he would repay the R 5000. Unfortunately, Ronald and Karen had a serious misunderstanding, and their relationship was affected negatively. Ronald took a few days leave. Karen, who was still very upset, changed the lock of Ronald’s room and put his belongings in a storeroom. Ronald returned from leave and discovered that his room was locked. He was furious and set Karen’s car on fire and broke into the storeroom as well as the room that he rented from Karen. In the process, he damaged the locks and the doors of both rooms. He also kicked the one fridge that Karen bought from Cheap Deal Wholesale and in the process damaged it badly. Karen called the security company that was responsible for the security of the hotel. Ronald, who is still upset asks his friend, Mike (a law student), to advise him about his options. Ronald’s friend advises him to institute the rei vindicatio against Karen to claim back his belongings and the control that he had over the rented room. Against this background answer the following questions: 2.1 Briefly explain which persons in the above set of facts can be described as “lawful holders”. In your answer specifically refer to the relevant things of which they are lawful holders. [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] 2.2 Briefly explain who holds a limited real right(s) in the above answer specifically refer to the relevant thing(s) over which [Your answer should not exceed 6 lines.] 2.3 Briefly describe Marianne’s real relationship with the towel in answer, refer to the mental element. [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] 2.4 How would you have described Marianne’s real relationship stole the towel? In your answer refer to the mental element. [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] 2.5 Briefly explain who holds a personal right against Karen. [Your answer should not exceed 8 lines.] 2.6 Which remedies are available to Karen regarding: (i) her car, (2) set of facts. In your these right(s) exist. (3) her suitcase. In your (2) with the towel if she (2) (4) (ii) the damaged locks of the room that Ronald rented and the doors of the storeroom, (iii) as well as the damaged fridge? Identify the most relevant remedy in each instance and briefly discuss Karen’s chances of success in each instance. (12) [Your answer should not exceed 20 lines.] 2.7 Fully advise Karen about the validity of the pledge agreement with Ronald and explain how she will be able to claim the R 5000 from Ronald. [7] [Your answer should not exceed 16 lines.] 2.8 Evaluate the correctness of Mike’s advice to Ronald regarding Ronald’s belongings and his control over the rented room. (5) [Your answer should not exceed 10 lines.] Question 2 total: [37] Question 3 Lungusile and Thuli were in a romantic relationship. The parties decided to live together and agreed to purchase a house in an upmarket suburban area. They moved into their house on 1 December 2020. Lungusile and Thuli are joint registered owners in undivided half shares of the property. Their relationship eventually broke down, and Thuli vacated the property in April 2021. Lungusile resides at the property and wishes to terminate the joint ownership of the property. Thuli refuses to terminate the joint ownership. 3.1 Identify the type of co-ownership that Lungusile and Thuli have over the property. Motivate your answer. (2) [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] 3.2 Thuli decides to sell the house. Is she entitled to do so? Substantiate your answer. (2) 3.3 Lungusile and Thuli’s relationship has broken down irretrievably and they cannot decide how to terminate their joint ownership. Advise them on their legal position. (2) Question 3 total: [6] Question 4 Jo-Ann and Peter occupy a farm close to Hlohlolwane in the Free State Province. The farm used to belong to them but was expropriated by the state in 2022. Jo-Ann and Peter struggle financially and do not have the means to buy another farm. Although their attorney, Dima (who practices in Bloemfontein), advised them to move, they decided to remain on the farm. They argue that the farm still belongs to them since the transfer of ownership to the state has not taken place yet. One morning while Jo-Ann and Peter were consulting with Dima virtually, one of their teenage daughters, Lea, asked whether she can ask Dima a favour. She wants Dima to help her to get hold of a new trendy energy drink called “Base” which is only available at Chess supermarkets. Since there is no Chess supermarket in Hlohlolwane, she asks Dima to buy a few of the energy drinks. A friend of Lea, Mary, who lives in Bloemfontein will be visiting Lea on the farm in Hlohlolwane over the coming weekend and will bring the Base energy drinks with her. Lea is worried that the Base energy drinks will sell out fast. Dima, who finds the discussion very entertaining, tells Lea that she already bought dozens of the energy drinks but that she does not like the taste and that Lea can get all her Base energy drinks that she has left. Mary collects the energy drinks at Dima’s office. Dima takes a selfie with Mary holding the Base drinks, they video call Lea and Mary promises to bring the Base drinks over the weekend. Against this background answer the following questions: 4.1 Fully advise Jo-Ann and Peter about their legal position regarding the farm. In your answer specifically focus on whether they are still owners of the farm and the validity of their argument regarding registration. (3) [Your answer should not exceed 6 lines.] [Your answer should not exceed 14 lines.] Question 5 Question 4 total: [10] 4.2 Mary arrives on the farm and hands the energy drinks to Lea. How did Lea become the owner of the Base drinks? Fully motivate your answer. (7) Malti was an owner of a plot of land which was used for farming. The farm could only be accessed by means of a road over Ebrahim’s property. Even though there was an 9 alternative longer gravel road that provides access to the nearest town, Malti was a servitude holder of a right of way over Ebrahim’s property in her personal capacity as owner of the dominant tenement. A servitude was registered against the title deeds of Malti’s property, in other words, the dominant tenement, and over Ebrahim’s property, the servient tenement. The right of way leading to Malti’s properties was accessible from the public street and as a result, a security risk was created because the properties were exposed to the presence of undesirable persons. Therefore, Malti requested the owner of the servient tenement for permission to erect a temporary gate across the right of way. Ebrahim refused to authorise the installation of a security gate. As a result of the safety risk to her on the farm, Malti decides to sell her property to Imran. Imran is in the process of purchasing the property. The property is not yet registered in his name. Ebrahim is aware of Imran’s prospective purchase of Malti’s property. 5.1 Identify the type of servitude that Malti has. Substantiate your answer. (2) [Your answer should not exceed 4 lines.] [Your answer should not exceed 6 lines.] Is Ebrahim legally obliged to grant Imran the servitude of right of way? (5) 5.2 Is Ebrahim entitled to refuse Malti the right to install a safety gate on the right of way if authorising the installation is a reasonable thing to do? (3) 5.3 Imran wants to use the right of way that belongs to Ebrahim. However, Ebrahim refuses. Imran alleges that Ebrahim had knowledge about his purchase of Malti’s property. As a result, he alleges that Ebrahim should grant him the right to use the servitude of right of way. [Your answer should not exceed 10 lines.] Question 6 Question 5 total: [10] Agri-Cosmo Investment bought a farm from Virat and Nadia. Virat and Nadia are leasing a cottage on the farmstead to Nelly and Themba. The lease agreement expires on 30 June 2024. Agri-Cosmo Investment is of the view that it is not bound by the lease agreement between Virat and Nadia and Nelly and Themba for a cottage on the 10 farmstead. Is the view correct? Substantiate your answer. (6) [Your answer should not exceed 12 lines.] Question 6 total: [6] Question 7 In 2020, while Harry and Nicole were on their Christmas holiday in Cape Town, a few families unlawfully occupied a portion of their farm, “Everglades”. Harry and Nicole do not like the idea that those families are unlawfully part of their farm because they are planning to develop an upmarket residential township on it. Briefly discuss how Harry and Nicole can go about removing the families that are unlawfully occupying a portion of Everglades. (5) [Your answer should not exceed 10 lines.] Question 7 total: [5] Question 8 The title deed of the farm, Everglades, belonging to Harry and Nicole prohibits the establishment of a township development because part of the farm is protected by environmental conservation legislation. Briefly discuss how this condition affects Harry and Nicole’s ownership over Everglades. [Your answer should not exceed 10 lines.] © UNISA 2023 (5) Question 8 total: [5] TOTAL: [100]