Gundwana v Steko Development
Gundwana v Steko Development and Others is an important case in South African property law, heard before the Constitutional Court on 10 February 2011. Facts. Elsie Gundwana bought a home through a loan provided by the bank, securing her debt by a mortgage bond on the property. When subsequently she fell into arrears, the bank obtained, by default judgement, an order declaring her property to be executable. The property was accordingly sold four years later. An order for eviction was sought against Ms Gundwana, and the matter ended up at the Constitutional Court. Issue. Gundwana sought  orders that the registrar, acting under the Uniform Rules of Court, could not grant an order declaring a mortgaged home to be executable. Judgment. The court held that the registrar's order, under section 31(5) of the Uniform Rules of Court, declaring residential property to be executable, was unconstitutional, because judicial oversight is required where execution is sought against indigent debtors. Consequences. The Uniform Rules of Court now contains an amendment dealing with the consequences of this judgment: (1)(a) No writ of execution against the immovable property of any judgment debtor shall issue until—