Majomatic 115 (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality and Others (303/2009) [2010] ZASCA 17; [2010] 3 All SA 415 (SCA) (18 March 2010)

Majomatic 115 (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality and Others (303/2009) [2010] ZASCA 17; [2010] 3 All SA 415 (SCA) (18 March 2010)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the relevant provisions of the Municipal Ordinance 20 of 1974 (Cape), specifically sections 124(2) and the non-offensive portions of section 124(1), remained in force after the advent of the Constitution, except to the extent of any inconsistency. The oversight powers of the Premier were inconsistent with the Constitution and should be disregarded, but the procedural requirements for advertising and considering objections to the sale of municipal property survived. The Local Government Transition Act did not provide alternative procedures for the alienation of municipal property. As the appellant failed to comply with the mandatory procedures...

Citation
[2010] ZASCA 17
Parties
Appellant: Majomatic 115 (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Kouga Municipality; Respondent: Johannes Renier Ferreira; Respondent: Federation of Kouga Ratepayers Association
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 March 2010
Case Number
303/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape High Court (port Elizabeth)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the plaintiff's action with costs.
Judges
Mthiyane, Cachalia, Leach, Majiedt, Saldulker
Legal Topics
Alienation of Municipal Property, Implied Repeal, Constitutional Consistency, Municipal Ordinance, Procedural Compliance
Administrative Law Land and Property Alienation of Municipal Property Implied Repeal Constitutional Consistency Municipal Ordinance Procedural Compliance

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Majomatic 115 (Pty) Limited

Appellant

Kouga Municipality

Respondent

Johannes Renier Ferreira

Respondent

Federation of Kouga Ratepayers Association

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape High Court (port Elizabeth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the procedures prescribed by sections 124(1), 124(2), and 172 of Municipal Ordinance 20 of 1974 (Cape) for the alienation of municipal property were of force and effect in November 2003.
  2. 2 Whether those provisions were impliedly repealed by Item 2 of Schedule 6 of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether compliance with the Ordinance was required for the conclusion of a valid contract of sale of municipal property.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the relevant provisions of the Municipal Ordinance 20 of 1974 (Cape), specifically sections 124(2) and the non-offensive portions of section 124(1), remained in force after the advent of the Constitution, except to the extent of any inconsistency. The oversight powers of the Premier were inconsistent with the Constitution and should be disregarded, but the procedural requirements for advertising and considering objections to the sale of municipal property survived. The Local Government Transition Act did not provide alternative procedures for the alienation of municipal property. As the appellant failed to comply with the mandatory procedures...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the plaintiff's action with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with: 'The plaintiff's action is dismissed with costs.'