Gundwana v Steko Development
South African legal case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Gundwana v Steko Development?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Gundwana v Steko Development CC and Others is an important case in South African property law and civil procedure. The Constitutional Court held unanimously that Registrars of the High Court are not constitutionally competent to authorise sales in execution of mortgaged homes when granting a default judgment. In such cases, the determination of executability requires judicial oversight, because it touches on the homeowner's right to housing under section 26 of the Constitution.
Gundwana v Steko Development | |
---|---|
Court | Constitutional Court of South Africa |
Full case name | Gundwana v Steko Development CC and Others |
Decided | 11 April 2011 (2011-04-11) |
Docket nos. | CCT 44/10 |
Citation(s) | [2011] ZACC 14; 2011 (3) SA 608 (CC); 2011 (8) BCLR 792 (CC) |
Case history | |
Prior action(s) | Gundwna v Steko Development CC [2010] ZAWCHC 365 in the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape Division |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Mogoeng J, Nkabinde J, van der Westhuizen J, Yacoob J and Mthiyane AJ |
Case opinions | |
Decision by | Froneman J (unanimous) |
The judgment was handed down on 11 April 2011 by Justice Johan Froneman. Heavily indebted to the logic of Jaftha v Schoeman, it partly overturned the Supreme Court of Appeal's earlier holding in Standard Bank v Saunderson.