Osman v Kariem

The parties were married under Muslim law and jointly purchased an immovable property in Pinelands, Cape Town in 2015. Due to the appellant’s financial difficulties and threats by creditors to attach his half share, the parties concluded a written deed of sale in February 2017 in terms of which the appellant sold his half share to the respondent. Although the deed recorded a purchase price of R1.2 million, it was common cause that no price was paid. The appellant’s half share was transferred to the respondent in January 2019, making her the sole registered owner. After the parties separated and divorced, the respondent sought to evict the appellant. The appellant resisted eviction, alleging that the written deed did not reflect the true intention of the parties and that there was an oral agreement that the transfer was temporary and that his half share would be re-transferred once his financial position improved.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, confirming that the respondent is the sole owner of the property.

The case reaffirms the strict application of the Shifren principle, the parol evidence rule, and the Alienation of Land Act in disputes involving alleged oral agreements relating to immovable property. It underscores that registered ownership prevails unless the underlying transaction is formally and successfully challenged, and clarifies that claims of co-ownership cannot be sustained through unwritten arrangements.