Tredcor Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd t/a Trentyre (judgment creditor) obtained a default judgment against Estrelac Investments (Pvt) Ltd (judgment debtor) on 26 March 2014 for USD782,796.51 plus interest and costs. On 10 July 2014, armed with a writ of execution, the Sheriff attached an undivided 5% share No. 19 in the remainder of Stand 1652 Salisbury Township measuring 1316 square metres, registered in the name of the judgment debtor. Hersel (Private) Limited (claimant) claimed ownership of the attached property, alleging it had concluded an agreement of sale and paid the purchase price to the judgment debtor prior to attachment. However, the claimant had not yet obtained transfer of the property. The property was subsequently sold in execution and the sale confirmed without objection from the claimant. The claimant then lodged an interpleader claim.
The claimant's claim was dismissed with costs at the attorney-client scale (punitive costs).
Registration of immovable property under the Deeds Registries Act is constitutive of legal ownership and confers real rights. Only the registered owner, as defined in the Act, is the lawful owner of immovable property. An agreement of sale and payment of purchase price without registration confers only a personal right to acquire property, not a real right of ownership. A personal right against a judgment debtor cannot defeat a judgment creditor's right to execute against property registered in the judgment debtor's name. A judgment creditor with a valid court order and writ of execution has an unfettered right to attach property registered in the judgment debtor's name, and such right cannot be defeated by a third party's unregistered personal rights.
The court made observations criticizing the claimant's conduct in initially accepting the attachment and sale without objection, only to subsequently lodge an unfounded claim. The court characterized this as a "fishing expedition in an empty swimming pool" and noted that courts frown upon such conduct which puts litigants to unnecessary costs and throws spanners into judicial proceedings. This justified the award of punitive costs at the attorney-client scale. The court also noted that the claimant appeared to have initially resigned itself to its fate by not objecting when served with notice of attachment, suggesting the claimant initially recognized it had no legal basis to challenge the attachment.
This case reinforces fundamental principles of Zimbabwean property law (applicable in South African context given the common law heritage): (1) registration is substantive and constitutive of real rights in immovable property, not merely procedural; (2) unregistered agreements of sale create only personal rights, not real rights; (3) personal rights cannot defeat the execution rights of judgment creditors against registered property of judgment debtors; (4) the statutory definition of 'owner' under deeds registration legislation is exhaustive and determinative. The case also demonstrates the courts' intolerance of belated and unfounded interpleader claims that waste judicial resources and impose unnecessary costs on litigants.