Assignment 1

Unique no: 577994

Student number: 49803506

Question 1

Peter and jenny have real rights over the farm.

Real right is a lawful real relationship between a legal subject and a thing which gives one
direct control over the thing on the legal subject, as well as the relationship between the
legal subject and all other legal subjects who must respect this relationship (scott, 2016)

Peter and jenny acquired this right when the farm was sold to them by the khumalos.

Paragraph 7 hendricks v hendricks

Question 2

Personal right is a right a legal subject has over another legal subject for the performance of
an obligation. Personal rights are also referred to as creditor’s claims. (scott, 2016)

Because of the right of habitatio that was reserved over the smaller homestead on the farm
so that the khumalos can stay there for as long as they lived, and this right was also
registered against the title deed of the farm of peter and jenny.

Paragraph 6 Hendricks v Hendricks

Question 3

No it will be unlawful for them to evict the khumalos.

‘“unlawful occupier” means a person who occupies land without the express or tacit consent
of the owner or person in charge, or without any other right in law to occupy such land,
excluding a person who is an occupier in terms of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act,
1997, and excluding a person whose informal right to land, but for the provisions of this Act
would be protected by the provisions of the Interim Protection of the Informal Land Rights
Act, 1996 (Act 31 of 1996).’

Paragraph 7 Hendricks v Hendricks

Question 4

Yes it is.

The spoliation remedy is a summary remedy, usually issued upon urgent application aimed
at restoring control of a thing to the applicant from whom it was taken by means of unlawful
self-help, without investigating the merits of the original rights of the parties to control the
thing. (scott, 2016, p. 162)

The khumalos had no choice but to move because things where moved by force.

1
Question 5

The khumalos will succeed because things were moved without their consent and they were
not sensitised about the date.

The spoliation remedy is a summary remedy, usually issued upon urgent application aimed
at restoring control of a thing to the applicant from whom it was taken by means of unlawful
self-help, without investigating the merits of the original rights of the parties to control the
thing (scott, 2016)

The spoliation remedy is aimed protecting the legal order, in a unique way. Its purpose is to
prevent self-help which may result in a breach of the peace. A spoliation order summarily
undoes the consequences of such self-help, without any reference to the lawfulness or
otherwise of the pre-existing control which is to be restored (scott, 2016) (Nino Bonino v De
Lange 1906 TS 120 125; Yeko v Qana 1973 (4) SA 735 (A) 739G)

The requirements for a successful reliance on spoliation remedy are

 The applicant spoliatus: the person whose control has been disturbed must have
enjoyed peaceful and undisturbed control of the thing.
 The respondent spoliator: the person who disturbed the control of the spoliatus must
have disturbed the applicant’s control in an unlawful manner.

2
ACADEMIC HONESTY DECLARATION

1. I understand what academic dishonesty entails and am aware of Unisa’s policies in this
regard and confirm that I have read and adhered to (i) the University’s Policy on Copyright
Infringement and Plagiarism and the Student Disciplinary Code, which are both available on
myUnisa: www.unisa.ac.za/unisarules, and (ii) the information relating to student values and
plagiarism that is found at https://www.unisa.ac.za/sites/myunisa/default/Study-@-
Unisa/Student-values-and-rules. I also understand the implications of not adhering to the
abovementioned policies.

2. I declare that these assignment answers are my own, original work.

3. I have not allowed, and will not allow anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing
it

off as his or her own.

4. I did not make use of another student’s work and submitted it as my own.

NAME: MAMUKHWANA CORNELIUS

SIGNATURE: MAMUKHWANA C

STUDENT NUMBER: 49803506

MODULE CODE: PVL3701

DATE: 2023-03-29

3
References
scott, s. (2016). property law. pretoria: university of south africa.

Hendricks v Hendricks (2016 (1) SA 511 (SCA))

Nino Bonino v De Lange 1906 TS 120 125; Yeko v Qana 1973 (4) SA 735 (A) 739G)