Wollach N.O. and Another v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (LCC120/2010) [2018] ZALCC 7 (19 April 2018)

Wollach N.O. and Another v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (LCC120/2010) [2018] ZALCC 7 (19 April 2018)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate under-compensation at dispossession, as the amount paid was just and equitable. The rejection of the applicants' valuation report was reasoned and supported by the judgment, and the respondents' valuation was accepted as credible. The legal principles governing compensation and valuation in land restitution were correctly applied, and the applicants' criticisms did not raise novel or unsettled issues. Given the clear precedent and legislative provisions, the court concluded that there are no reasonable prospects of success on appeal, and another court would not reach a different conclusion.

Citation
[2018] ZALCC 7
Parties
Applicant: Abraham Lama Wollach N.O.; Applicant: Hartebeeskraal Farms (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Government of the Republic of South Africa; Respondent: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Commission on Restitution of Land Rights; Respondent: Regional Land Claims Commissioner
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 April 2018
Case Number
LCC 120/2010
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
M P Canca
Legal Topics
Just and Equitable Compensation, Land Restitution, Valuation of Farmland, Group Areas Act Dispossession, Leave to Appeal Test, Section 25 Constitution
Land and Property Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Just and Equitable Compensation Land Restitution Valuation of Farmland Group Areas Act Dispossession Leave to Appeal Test +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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abraham Lama Wollach N.O.

Applicant

Hartebeeskraal Farms (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Government of the Republic of South Africa

Respondent

Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Commission on Restitution of Land Rights

Respondent

Regional Land Claims Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were under-compensated at dispossession of the farm under the Group Areas Act.
  2. 2 Whether the valuation approach adopted by the court was correct for purposes of land restitution.
  3. 3 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success for an appeal against the judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate under-compensation at dispossession, as the amount paid was just and equitable. The rejection of the applicants' valuation report was reasoned and supported by the judgment, and the respondents' valuation was accepted as credible. The legal principles governing compensation and valuation in land restitution were correctly applied, and the applicants' criticisms did not raise novel or unsettled issues. Given the clear precedent and legislative provisions, the court concluded that there are no reasonable prospects of success on appeal, and another court would not reach a different conclusion.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.