Allaclas Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Milnerton Golf Club and Others (673/06) [2007] ZASCA 167; [2007] SCA 167 (RSA); [2008] 2 All SA 1 (SCA); 2008 (3) SA 134 (SCA) (29 November 2007)

Allaclas Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Milnerton Golf Club and Others (673/06) [2007] ZASCA 167; [2007] SCA 167 (RSA); [2008] 2 All SA 1 (SCA); 2008 (3) SA 134 (SCA) (29 November 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the incidence of golf balls entering the appellants' property was excessive and unreasonable, constituting a nuisance and unlawful interference with their rights. The court held that while some tolerance is required between neighbours, the frequency and danger posed by the golf balls went beyond what is reasonable. The fact that the golf course had existed since 1925 and that the appellants purchased the property knowing its proximity to the course did not absolve the golf club from its duty to take reasonable steps to prevent harm. The court accepted the solution proposed by the respondent's own expert, requiring the implementation of barriers near...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 167
Parties
Appellant: Allaclas Investments (Pty) Ltd; Appellant: Alexander Simonis; Respondent: Milnerton Golf Club; Respondent: Robert GL Stelzner; Respondent: Susan Stelzner; Respondent: Stephen Moriarty; Respondent: Liyaquat Allie Parker; Respondent: Gail Tunesi
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 2007
Case Number
673/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Cape High Court Judgment Refusing Interdict
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs; High Court order set aside and replaced with an interdict requiring the golf club to implement safety barriers.
Judges
Farlam, Brand, Mlambo, Combrinck, Mhlantla
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Neighbour Law, Unreasonable Interference, Interdict, Safety Measures
Land and Property Delict Nuisance Neighbour Law Unreasonable Interference Interdict Safety Measures

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allaclas Investments (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Alexander Simonis

Appellant

Milnerton Golf Club

Respondent

Robert GL Stelzner

Respondent

Susan Stelzner

Respondent

Stephen Moriarty

Respondent

Liyaquat Allie Parker

Respondent

Gail Tunesi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Cape High Court Judgment Refusing Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the operation of the sixth hole of the Milnerton Golf Club constitutes an unreasonable interference with the appellants' property rights.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants are entitled to an interdict requiring the golf club to implement effective safety measures to prevent excessive strikes by golf balls.
  3. 3 What constitutes reasonable use and tolerance between neighbouring properties in the context of a golf course adjacent to residential property.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the incidence of golf balls entering the appellants' property was excessive and unreasonable, constituting a nuisance and unlawful interference with their rights. The court held that while some tolerance is required between neighbours, the frequency and danger posed by the golf balls went beyond what is reasonable. The fact that the golf course had existed since 1925 and that the appellants purchased the property knowing its proximity to the course did not absolve the golf club from its duty to take reasonable steps to prevent harm. The court accepted the solution proposed by the respondent's own expert, requiring the implementation of barriers near...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs; High Court order set aside and replaced with an interdict requiring the golf club to implement safety barriers.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the High Court dismissing the application with costs is set aside.