eThekwini Municipality and Others v Haffejee NO and Others, Haffejee NO and Others v eThekwini Municipality and Others (9845/2006, 7098/2008) [2009] ZAKZDHC 76; 2010 (6) BCLR 578 (KZD); [2010] 2 All SA 358 (KZD) (14 December 2009)

eThekwini Municipality and Others v Haffejee NO and Others, Haffejee NO and Others v eThekwini Municipality and Others (9845/2006, 7098/2008) [2009] ZAKZDHC 76; 2010 (6) BCLR 578 (KZD); [2010] 2 All SA 358 (KZD) (14 December 2009)

The court found that the municipality had substantially complied with the requirements of the Local Authorities Ordinance and the Expropriation Act in giving notice to the trust and inviting objections. The fact that notice was sent to the trust's registered address and received by a trustee was sufficient, and no prejudice was shown. The court rejected the trustees' argument that the Expropriation Act is unconstitutional for failing to require pre-determination of compensation, holding that section 25 of the Constitution does not impose such a requirement. The statutory scheme allows for compensation to be agreed or determined after expropriation, which is consistent with constitutional...

Citation
[2009] ZAKZDHC 76
Parties
Applicant: eThekwini Municipality; Respondent: Yusuf Goolam Mahomed Haffejee N.O.; Respondent: Mohammed Yusuf Haffejee N.O.; Respondent: Ebrahim Yusuf Haffejee N.O.; Applicant: Sarah Haffejee N.O.; Respondent: Minister of Public Works; Respondent: Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 December 2009
Case Number
9845/2006, 7098/2008
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Judgment After Hearing Consolidated Arguments on Eviction and Constitutional Challenge
Outcome
Eviction application granted; constitutional application dismissed.
Judges
Theron
Legal Topics
Expropriation Act, Notice Requirements, Just and Equitable Compensation, Right to Property, Procedural Fairness, Eviction
Land and Property Constitutional Law Administrative Law Expropriation Act Notice Requirements Just and Equitable Compensation Right to Property Procedural Fairness +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

eThekwini Municipality

Applicant

Yusuf Goolam Mahomed Haffejee N.O.

Respondent

Mohammed Yusuf Haffejee N.O.

Respondent

Ebrahim Yusuf Haffejee N.O.

Respondent

Sarah Haffejee N.O.

Applicant

Minister of Public Works

Respondent

Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Judgment After Hearing Consolidated Arguments on Eviction and Constitutional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the municipality complied with statutory requirements for expropriation and eviction.
  2. 2 Whether the Expropriation Act provisions are unconstitutional for failing to require pre-determination of compensation.
  3. 3 Whether the trustees' rights to property, administrative justice, and equality were violated by the expropriation process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the municipality had substantially complied with the requirements of the Local Authorities Ordinance and the Expropriation Act in giving notice to the trust and inviting objections. The fact that notice was sent to the trust's registered address and received by a trustee was sufficient, and no prejudice was shown. The court rejected the trustees' argument that the Expropriation Act is unconstitutional for failing to require pre-determination of compensation, holding that section 25 of the Constitution does not impose such a requirement. The statutory scheme allows for compensation to be agreed or determined after expropriation, which is consistent with constitutional...

Court Disposition

Eviction application granted; constitutional application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for consolidation is refused.
  • The constitutional application is dismissed.