South African labour leader Zwelinzima Vavi and his wife Noluthando have won a temporary reprieve in a legal battle with Standard Bank over their Sandton home, as the bank failed in its recent attempt to obtain court approval to foreclose on their property.
Standard Bank had applied to the Johannesburg High Court to repossess the couple’s primary residence due to arrears on their mortgage bond. However, Judge Stuart Wilson ruled against the bank, citing a lack of clear evidence to justify foreclosure as a fair and reasonable step.
According to court records, the Vavis fell behind on their mortgage bond repayments several years ago, owing just over R85,000 in arrears at the time of the hearing. However, the judge noted that the couple had shown consistent effort in paying off their loan over the past 18 months, with no missed instalments since falling behind.
Standard Bank also claimed over R160,000 in legal fees – nearly double the amount of the actual arrears. The judge expressed concern over this, highlighting that legal costs and repayment arrears should be treated as separate issues.
In his judgment, Judge Wilson stated:
“A court must be satisfied that foreclosure of a primary residence is proportionate – meaning it should be the last resort when there’s no meaningful chance of recovering the debt by other means.”
He explained that although the Vavis live in an expensive area of Sandton, this fact alone does not justify seizing the property. Rather, the focus must be on whether foreclosure is the only option available, especially when the couple has continued to pay their monthly bond instalments reliably.
“This is one of those rare cases,” the judge said. “Despite their earlier arrears, the Vavis have made significant progress, reducing their debt from nearly R170,000 to R85,000 and have shown steady commitment to paying off what they owe.”
Judge Wilson indefinitely postponed the foreclosure application and ruled that both parties should cover their own legal costs.
He also said that if Standard Bank wants to continue with the foreclosure in the future, it must bring new evidence to show that seizing the property is truly a proportionate step.
The couple’s financial issues, however, go beyond this court matter. In February 2024, it was reported that the City of Johannesburg had taken the Vavis to court for allegedly owing more than R400,000 in unpaid municipal bills, including rates and levies on the same Sandton home.
At the time, the city council was reportedly asking the High Court to issue an order forcing the couple to pay R433,493. The case was related to utility bills and municipal services, though it’s unclear what the final outcome of that legal process was.
Noluthando Vavi had responded to media inquiries saying that they only became aware of the legal action after the Press contacted them about the court papers. The couple bought the home in 2008 for R2 million.
This latest ruling is a temporary relief for the Vavis, but the financial challenges and legal pressures facing the couple appear far from over. Still, the court has emphasised the need to balance a bank’s right to recover its debt with the importance of protecting families from losing their homes unjustly.
Legal analysts have noted that the ruling could influence similar foreclosure matters, particularly where the debtor has shown consistent repayment and good faith efforts to reduce arrears.
