Bester Eiendomsontwikkelingsmaatskappy (Edms) Bpk. v Stadsraad van Pretoria (26/88) [1988] ZASCA 26 (29 March 1988)

Bester Eiendomsontwikkelingsmaatskappy (Edms) Bpk. v Stadsraad van Pretoria (26/88) [1988] ZASCA 26 (29 March 1988)

The court held that the fair compensation for the expropriated land must be determined by considering its actual development potential and the risks associated with dolomite instability. While the majority of the land was only suitable for use as a dumping site, two small triangular portions were found to have genuine potential for high-density residential development. The court rejected the appellant's inflated claims and the respondent's undervaluation, instead arriving at a balanced figure based on the evidence of comparable sales, expert testimony, and the practical realities of the property. The court awarded R370,000 for the land, R10,000 for solatium, and dismissed the claim for...

Citation
[1988] ZASCA 26
Parties
Appellant: Bester Eiendomsontwikkelingsmaatskappy (Edms) Bpk.; Respondent: Stadsraad van Pretoria
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 1988
Case Number
26/88
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Court a Quo on Compensation for Expropriation and Costs Orders.
Outcome
Appeal upheld; cross-appeal dismissed. Compensation increased and costs order amended.
Judges
Viljoen, Hefer, Vivier
Legal Topics
Expropriation, Compensation for Expropriation, Valuation of Land, Costs Award, Onteieningswet 1975
Land and Property Civil Procedure Expropriation Compensation for Expropriation Valuation of Land Costs Award Onteieningswet 1975

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

Parties

Bester Eiendomsontwikkelingsmaatskappy (Edms) Bpk.

Appellant

Stadsraad van Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Court a Quo on Compensation for Expropriation and Costs Orders.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the fair compensation payable to the appellant for the expropriated land under the Expropriation Act 63 of 1975?
  2. 2 Is the appellant entitled to additional compensation for actual financial loss and solatium?
  3. 3 How should the costs of the proceedings be apportioned between the parties?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the fair compensation for the expropriated land must be determined by considering its actual development potential and the risks associated with dolomite instability. While the majority of the land was only suitable for use as a dumping site, two small triangular portions were found to have genuine potential for high-density residential development. The court rejected the appellant's inflated claims and the respondent's undervaluation, instead arriving at a balanced figure based on the evidence of comparable sales, expert testimony, and the practical realities of the property. The court awarded R370,000 for the land, R10,000 for solatium, and dismissed the claim for...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; cross-appeal dismissed. Compensation increased and costs order amended.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the appellant R370,000 as compensation for the expropriated land under section 12(1)(a)(i) of Act 63 of 1975.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay R10,000 as solatium under section 12(2) of the Act.