Jacobs en 'n Ander v Waks en Andere (113/1990) [1991] ZASCA 152; 1992 (1) SA 521 (AD); (20 November 1991)

Jacobs en 'n Ander v Waks en Andere (113/1990) [1991] ZASCA 152; 1992 (1) SA 521 (AD); (20 November 1991)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Carletonville Town Council's decisions to reserve public parks for the exclusive use of whites were invalid. The Council failed to properly consider the interests of all affected persons, including non-white members of the broader Carletonville community, and did not act bona fide or apply its mind to relevant considerations. The applicants demonstrated sufficient direct interest through their business losses, status as municipal taxpayers, and infringement of dignity, thus establishing locus standi. The Council's explanations for its decisions were inadequate and lacked transparency, and the purported motivations—whether based on complaints of...

Citation
[1991] ZASCA 152
Parties
Appellant: Gert Petrus Jacobs; Appellant: Stadsraad van Carletonville; Respondent: Sorrel Geoffrey Waks; Respondent: John Billy Motsau; Respondent: Abdul Rhman Bhamjee
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 November 1991
Case Number
113/1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division, Review and Setting Aside of Municipal Decisions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Corbett, Botha, Smalberger, Milne, Nienaber
Legal Topics
Ultra Vires Decision, Locus Standi, Municipal Powers, Racial Discrimination, Review of Administrative Action, Public Amenities
Administrative Law Land and Property Civil Procedure Ultra Vires Decision Locus Standi Municipal Powers Racial Discrimination Review of Administrative Action +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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gert Petrus Jacobs

Appellant

Stadsraad van Carletonville

Appellant

Sorrel Geoffrey Waks

Respondent

John Billy Motsau

Respondent

Abdul Rhman Bhamjee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division, Review and Setting Aside of Municipal Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Carletonville Town Council's decisions to reserve certain parks for exclusive use by whites were valid under the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, 1953.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants had locus standi to seek review and setting aside of the municipal decisions.
  3. 3 Whether the Town Council properly considered the interests of all affected persons before making its decisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Carletonville Town Council's decisions to reserve public parks for the exclusive use of whites were invalid. The Council failed to properly consider the interests of all affected persons, including non-white members of the broader Carletonville community, and did not act bona fide or apply its mind to relevant considerations. The applicants demonstrated sufficient direct interest through their business losses, status as municipal taxpayers, and infringement of dignity, thus establishing locus standi. The Council's explanations for its decisions were inadequate and lacked transparency, and the purported motivations—whether based on complaints of...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellants are ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, including the costs of two counsel.