or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court determines: (a) that the issuance of a protective certificate meant that the time in which that certificate was in operation should be disregarded in terms of the calculation of statutory time limits in possession proceedings; (b) that it was inappropriate to consider if, hypothetically, section 11 of the Statute of Limitations applied to orders for possession; and (c) that it was not necessary to grant fresh leave for the execution of an order for possession where the previous order was still valid.
Plaintiff seeks order granting leave to issue execution in the proceedings on foot of an order for possession and order stating that s11 of the statute of limitations does not apply to order granting leave to issue execution of proceedings from November 2019 – request more than 12 years from original order for possession – central office claimed statute barred – protective certificate had been obtained – issued 11 December 2019 and expired May 2020 – that period to be disregarded – thus under 12 years and not statute barred – unnecessary to grant new order where previous one is still in effect – order stating that s11 of the statute of limitations does not apply to these orders would be a hypothetical one and thus it is not appropriate to consider the question here.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.