Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Court is not an ice cream shop: Inside Pretoria taxi violence trial that freed Lungelo Nkosi

October 18, 2026

First 90 days after disaster can define years of legal fallout, experts warn

October 18, 2026

LPC warns against unregulated legal services, clarifies legal consultant ruling

October 17, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Court is not an ice cream shop: Inside Pretoria taxi violence trial that freed Lungelo Nkosi
  • First 90 days after disaster can define years of legal fallout, experts warn
  • LPC warns against unregulated legal services, clarifies legal consultant ruling
  • Unheard on the stand: Courtroom rules silence disabled witnesses, study finds
  • FNB customer demands R15,100 refund after fraudsters drain account using stolen phone
  • Police seize six fraudulently bought Jetour T2 Hybrid SUVs worth R4.7m en route to Pretoria
  • Mrs South Africa finalist Gavaza Mongwe inspires future engineers at TUT
  • Protracted reinstatement battle meant military colonel claimed damages three years too late
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » SPAR ordered to leave Ebony Park shopping centre after failed lease renewal
Property Law

SPAR ordered to leave Ebony Park shopping centre after failed lease renewal

The High Court in Johannesburg ruled that SPAR did not properly exercise its lease renewal option, allowing the property’s new owner to reclaim the premises.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliJuly 17, 2026Updated:July 17, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
Acting Judge S van Aswegen ruled that SPAR must vacate the Ebony Park shopping centre after finding it failed to renew its lease in time.
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • The High Court in Johannesburg found that SPAR missed the contractual deadline to renew its lease.
  • Acting Judge S van Aswegen ordered SPAR to vacate the Ebony Park shopping centre by 28 August 2026.
  • The court dismissed SPAR’s arguments about standing, non-joinder and arbitration before granting the eviction order.

The High Court in Johannesburg has ordered The SPAR Group Limited to vacate its premises at the Ebony Park shopping centre in Midrand, finding that it did not exercise its lease renewal rights within the time required by its agreements with the property owner.

Acting Judge S van Aswegen ruled in favour of Eco Energy Projects (Pty) Ltd, which bought the shopping centre in May 2026. The court found that SPAR’s lease had expired and its continued occupation was unlawful.

Lease renewal at the heart of the dispute

Eco Energy Projects brought an urgent application after taking ownership of the shopping centre from Krisp Properties Commercial (Pty) Ltd. The company argued that SPAR’s lease ended on 30 April 2026 and that the retailer no longer had any legal right to occupy the premises.

SPAR opposed the application, saying it had validly exercised its contractual right to renew the lease through correspondence exchanged in 2025. It also argued that Eco Energy Projects bought the property subject to the existing lease and was therefore bound by the renewal.

SPAR also challenged Eco Energy Projects’ legal standing, argued that Krisp Properties, AJP Properties, and Shoprite should have been joined to the proceedings, and said the dispute should have gone to arbitration.

Court dismisses preliminary objections

Judge Van Aswegen rejected all of SPAR’s preliminary objections before turning to the merits of the eviction application. On legal standing, the judge found that Eco Energy Projects had proved it owned the property and was entitled to seek possession through the rei vindicatio.

The court also found that none of the entities named by SPAR had a direct legal interest in the eviction proceedings because no relief was sought against them.

Addressing SPAR’s reliance on an arbitration clause, Judge Van Aswegen said the mere reference to such a clause in one relevant commercial agreement did not deprive the court of jurisdiction.

Renewal option not exercised in time

The key issue before the court was whether SPAR had properly used its contractual option to renew the lease. Before the court case, SPAR relied on an email dated 11 August 2025. During the proceedings, however, it shifted its case to rely on correspondence dated 15 October and 4 November 2025.

Judge Van Aswegen found that neither exchange amounted to a valid exercise of the renewal option. “There is no clear exercise of a right of renewal in this email,” the judge said about the 15 October 2025 correspondence.

Instead, the court found that the October correspondence only exercised SPAR’s option to take cession of the lease from the previous tenant and noted its entitlement to future renewal options.

The judge said SPAR itself showed how contractual options were exercised by using clear and direct language in later correspondence.

When SPAR finally wrote on 9 March 2026, “We hereby notify you that we elect to exercise our option to renew the Agreement of Lease for a further period of five years,” the notice came after the six-month contractual period and was therefore ineffective.

Judge Van Aswegen described this as a “late attempt to fix its failure to exercise that right in time”.

Eviction order granted

After finding that Eco Energy Projects had proved ownership of the premises and that SPAR had no justification for staying, the court granted the eviction application.

“I therefore find that the Respondent has failed to justify its continued occupation of the premises. Its attempt to exercise the option to renew was late and outside the required timeframe,” Judge Van Aswegen said.

The judge noted that SPAR had already been given two months after the lease expired to leave voluntarily and should have planned for the possibility of an unfavourable outcome by making contingency arrangements.

The court confirmed that the lease had ended, ordered SPAR and anyone occupying through it to leave by 28 August 2026, authorised the sheriff to enforce the eviction from 29 August 2026 if needed, and ordered SPAR to pay the legal costs, including those for senior counsel on Scale C.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

Commercial lease Eco Energy Projects Eviction High Court in Johannesburg SPAR
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Couple unlawfully fenced off shared property to create a larger play area for their children

October 16, 2026

Body corporate loses execution order after summons went missing in its own building

October 15, 2026

Tenant who withheld R1.4 million in rent, citing maintenance failures, ordered to leave property

October 13, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 9   +   3   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
Don't Miss
Opinion
5 Mins Read

Court is not an ice cream shop: Inside Pretoria taxi violence trial that freed Lungelo Nkosi

By Moafrika Wa MailaOctober 18, 20265 Mins Read

Defence attorney Moafrika Wa Maila reflects on the Pretoria taxi violence trial that led to Lungelo Nkosi’s release from custody and explores the emotional demands of criminal defence, courtroom teamwork and the meaning of justice.

First 90 days after disaster can define years of legal fallout, experts warn

October 18, 2026

LPC warns against unregulated legal services, clarifies legal consultant ruling

October 17, 2026

Unheard on the stand: Courtroom rules silence disabled witnesses, study finds

October 17, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024
OUR PICKS

LPC warns against unregulated legal services, clarifies legal consultant ruling

October 17, 2026

Tenant who withheld R1.4 million in rent, citing maintenance failures, ordered to leave property

October 13, 2026

Studio 88 employee overcharged customer using till she had not been trained to operate

October 14, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Buy Now
  • Law & Justice

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by