Patmar Explorations (Pty) Ltd and Others v Limpopo Development Tribunal and Others (67446/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1089 (24 June 2015)

Patmar Explorations (Pty) Ltd and Others v Limpopo Development Tribunal and Others (67446/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1089 (24 June 2015)

The court held that the Limpopo Development Tribunal was not divested of its powers to consider and approve land development applications submitted before the expiry of the suspension period of constitutional invalidity of Chapters V and VI of the Development Facilitation Act. The Constitutional Court's judgment did not bar tribunals outside Johannesburg and eThekwini from finalising such applications, and the declaration of invalidity was not retrospective. The applicants failed to establish that the Tribunal lacked authority or that the approval was unlawful on the sole ground advanced. Procedural defects in the applicants' approach were not fatal, but the substantive challenge failed....

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 1089
Parties
Applicant: Patmar Explorations (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Patmar Energy (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Patmar Remanufacturing (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Huilbos Beleggings (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Avant Verspreiders (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Limpopo Development Tribunal; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Limpopo Province; Respondent: Premier of Limpopo; Respondent: Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Gabriel Stephanus Labuschagne N.O; Respondent: Catharina Lefina Labuschagne N.O; Respondent: Abel Hermanus Gerhardus Nell N.O; Respondent: Loskop Motors (Pty) Ltd tla T M Auto Caltex; Respondent: J H Jardin t/a Loskop Vallei Filling Station (BP); Respondent: J K G Petrol Sales CC; Respondent: ET Papadopoulos; Respondent: A Papadopoulos
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 June 2015
Case Number
67446/2012
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Application for Review and Declaratory Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.
Judges
N.F Kgomo
Legal Topics
Development Facilitation Act, Constitutional Invalidity, Municipal Planning, Legality Review, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Land Use Rights
Administrative Law Land and Property Constitutional Law Development Facilitation Act Constitutional Invalidity Municipal Planning Legality Review Promotion of Administrative Justice Act +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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patmar Explorations (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Patmar Energy (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Patmar Remanufacturing (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Huilbos Beleggings (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Avant Verspreiders (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Limpopo Development Tribunal

Respondent

Member of the Executive Council for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Limpopo Province

Respondent

Premier of Limpopo

Respondent

Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Gabriel Stephanus Labuschagne N.O

Respondent

Catharina Lefina Labuschagne N.O

Respondent

Abel Hermanus Gerhardus Nell N.O

Respondent

Loskop Motors (Pty) Ltd tla T M Auto Caltex

Respondent

J H Jardin t/a Loskop Vallei Filling Station (BP)

Respondent

J K G Petrol Sales CC

Respondent

ET Papadopoulos

Respondent

A Papadopoulos

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Application for Review and Declaratory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Limpopo Development Tribunal retained authority to approve land development applications under Chapter V of the Development Facilitation Act after the expiry of the suspension period of constitutional invalidity.
  2. 2 Whether the date of submission or the date of approval is determinative of the Tribunal's authority.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' procedural approach in bringing the review under Rule 6 instead of Rule 53, and without requesting the record, was permissible.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Limpopo Development Tribunal was not divested of its powers to consider and approve land development applications submitted before the expiry of the suspension period of constitutional invalidity of Chapters V and VI of the Development Facilitation Act. The Constitutional Court's judgment did not bar tribunals outside Johannesburg and eThekwini from finalising such applications, and the declaration of invalidity was not retrospective. The applicants failed to establish that the Tribunal lacked authority or that the approval was unlawful on the sole ground advanced. Procedural defects in the applicants' approach were not fatal, but the substantive challenge failed....

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.

Orders

  • The application as set out in the Notice of Motion is hereby dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.