Administrator of the Transvaal and Another v J Van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Pty) Ltd. (640/88) [1990] ZASCA 78; 1990 (4) SA 644 (AD); [1990] 2 All SA 526 (A) (28 August 1990)

Administrator of the Transvaal and Another v J Van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Pty) Ltd. (640/88) [1990] ZASCA 78; 1990 (4) SA 644 (AD); [1990] 2 All SA 526 (A) (28 August 1990)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 7(1) of the Roads Ordinance 22 of 1957 confers broad powers on the Administrator to acquire land not only for the direct construction of roads but also for any purpose reasonably expedient and in connection with such construction. The relocation of Sentrachem's railway line, a vital industrial service, was inextricably associated with the approved road scheme and thus fell within the statutory purpose. The court rejected a narrow interpretation that would limit expropriation to only what is strictly necessary for physical road construction. Furthermore, the court found that the description of the expropriated land in Notice 1909, when read...

Citation
[1990] ZASCA 78
Parties
Appellant: The Administrator of the Transvaal; Appellant: Sentrachem Limited; Respondent: J Van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Proprietary) Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 August 1990
Case Number
640/88
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Leave to Appeal Granted; Judgment Delivered
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Notice 1909 declared valid; costs order varied.
Judges
Botha, Smalberger, Steyn, Eksteen, Smuts
Legal Topics
Expropriation of Land, Road Construction, Statutory Interpretation, Adequacy of Description, Public Interest, Ultra Vires
Land and Property Administrative Law Civil Procedure Expropriation of Land Road Construction Statutory Interpretation Adequacy of Description Public Interest +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Administrator of the Transvaal

Appellant

Sentrachem Limited

Appellant

J Van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Proprietary) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division; Leave to Appeal Granted; Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Administrator's Notice 1909 was ultra vires the powers conferred by section 7(1) of the Roads Ordinance 22 of 1957.
  2. 2 Whether the expropriation of the respondent's land for the relocation of a private railway line was a legitimate purpose under section 7(1).
  3. 3 Whether Notice 1909 failed for lack of adequate description of the land expropriated.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 7(1) of the Roads Ordinance 22 of 1957 confers broad powers on the Administrator to acquire land not only for the direct construction of roads but also for any purpose reasonably expedient and in connection with such construction. The relocation of Sentrachem's railway line, a vital industrial service, was inextricably associated with the approved road scheme and thus fell within the statutory purpose. The court rejected a narrow interpretation that would limit expropriation to only what is strictly necessary for physical road construction. Furthermore, the court found that the description of the expropriated land in Notice 1909, when read...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Notice 1909 declared valid; costs order varied.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs, including costs of two counsel for each appellant in respect of both the appeal and the application for leave to appeal.
  • Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order of the court a quo are set aside and substituted with an order declaring Administrator's Notice 1909 of 4 September 1985, insofar as it relates to portion 213 of Zuurfontein 33 IR, to be valid.