BSB International Link CC v Readam South Africa (Pty) Ltd (279/2015) [2016] ZASCA 58; [2016] 2 All SA 633 (SCA); 2016 (4) SA 83 (SCA) (13 April 2016)

BSB International Link CC v Readam South Africa (Pty) Ltd (279/2015) [2016] ZASCA 58; [2016] 2 All SA 633 (SCA); 2016 (4) SA 83 (SCA) (13 April 2016)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that BSB had contravened the Sandton Town Planning Scheme by exceeding the maximum coverage and failing to provide the required parking bays. The evidence presented by Readam, including expert measurements, was undisputed and established the contraventions. The municipality's approval of the building plans was unlawful and must be reviewed and set aside. The court held that, under common law, it had discretion to order partial demolition to remedy the illegality, as opposed to the statutory regime under section 21 of the NBSA, which reserves demolition applications for local authorities or the Minister. The appellant's counter-application for discovery...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 58
Parties
Appellant: BSB International Link CC; Respondent: Readam South Africa (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 April 2016
Case Number
279/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Local Division, High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed except for amendments to the high court's order.
Judges
Ponnan, Majiedt, Swain, Victor, Kathree-Setiloane
Legal Topics
Building Regulations, Town Planning Scheme, Locus Standi, Review of Administrative Action, Demolition Order, Certificate of Occupancy
Land and Property Administrative Law Civil Procedure Building Regulations Town Planning Scheme Locus Standi Review of Administrative Action Demolition Order +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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BSB International Link CC

Appellant

Readam South Africa (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Local Division, High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the building plans approved by the municipality were lawful and compliant with the Sandton Town Planning Scheme.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant contravened the maximum coverage and parking requirements imposed by the scheme.
  3. 3 Whether the court a quo erred in granting a partial demolition order and in dismissing the appellant's counter-application for discovery.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that BSB had contravened the Sandton Town Planning Scheme by exceeding the maximum coverage and failing to provide the required parking bays. The evidence presented by Readam, including expert measurements, was undisputed and established the contraventions. The municipality's approval of the building plans was unlawful and must be reviewed and set aside. The court held that, under common law, it had discretion to order partial demolition to remedy the illegality, as opposed to the statutory regime under section 21 of the NBSA, which reserves demolition applications for local authorities or the Minister. The appellant's counter-application for discovery...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed except for amendments to the high court's order.

Orders

  • Paragraph 1 of the high court's order is deleted and replaced with an order reviewing and setting aside the municipality's approval of building plans for Erf 426, Parkmore Township.
  • Paragraph 4 of the high court's order is amended to require certification by a suitably qualified engineer that partial demolition will not compromise structural integrity and safety.