Hillowitz and Another v Germiston Town Council and Another

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Vieyra AJ
• Judgment Date: 16 May 1962
• Citation: 1962 (3) SA 335 (W)
• Hearing Date: 17 April 1962
• Court: Witwatersrand Local Division

B Vieyra, A.J.:

This is an application arising out of the first respondent's refusal to grant certificates to enable the applicant to obtain certain business licences under the Licences Consolidation Act, 32 of 1925, as also the refusal to grant certain municipal licences in terms of the local Government Ordinance, 17 of 1939.

C The premises in respect of which the certificates and licences were sought are situate on stand 516, corner of Smit Street and Refinery Road, Germiston South, Extension No. 1, and were leased by the applicants from the owners, Refinery Corner Properties Ltd. Having obtained the approval of the first respondent to that end the premises D were converted into three separate shops, it being proposed to carry on the following businesses:

(a)

in shop No. 1: outfitters, grocers and ordinary merchants;

(b)

in shop No. 2: grocers, tearoom and fish and chip shop keepers;

(c)

in shop No. 3: a butchery and delicatessen business.

It is clear that the renovations and reconstruction effected to the E premises in question have resulted in the creation of a small open space at the intersection of Refinery Road and Smit Street where none formerly existed. All the entrances to the new shops are in Smit Street as also is the entrance to a yard which is to be found at the rear of the shops.

F In April, 1961, the applicants applied to the first respondent for licence certificates to enable them to obtain licences from the Receiver of Revenue at Germiston to carry on the businesses of a:

(i)

general dealer,

(ii)

native eating-house keeper,

(iii)

retail butcher,

G in the new premises, as also for municipal licences in respect of the businesses of a fish fryer and a milk purveyor. All the applications were refused but the first respondent refused to give its reasons for such refusal. Thereupon on the 28th November, 1961, application was made to this Court to set aside that refusal on various grounds which it is H not necessary to detail. On the 8th December, 1961, the first respondent consented to an order being made setting aside its refusal aforesaid and to a direction that it should reconsider the applications for certificates and licences on their merits. It would now appear that the reason for the refusal was that the licensing committee was of the opinion that the granting of the application would result in a serious traffic hazard; but that as at the hearing before it no opportunity had been given to the applicant to deal with this aspect, it was decided to consent to the order aforesaid.

Vieyra AJ

On the 13th December, 1961, and in pursuance of this order of Court the applications again came before the licensing committee which then consisted of Councillors Botha (chairman), de Witt, Ehlers, and Paintin. No one who had sat at the previous hearing sat at the second hearing. A The applicants were represented by counsel. Certain objectors being the Simmer and Jack Trading Stores and the second respondent were represented at that hearing by their respective attorneys. Objections had also been filed by 19 residents who live in Ivor Road, but they were not represented. During the course of the hearing a further notice of objection was handed in emanating...