South Africa Case Law

Oreste v Devi and Another (17136/2007)

Oreste v Devi and Another (17136/2007) [2014] ZAGPPHC 189 (4 April 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

17136/2007

Judge

Wepener

The court held that the defendant's right to claim transfer of the immovable property under section 48(2) of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act is a personal right, not a real right. Such a right is subject to prescription under section 11(d) of the Prescription Act, which prescribes after three years. The defendant failed to effect transfer within the statutory period and did not apply for extension. The authorities of the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court establish that claims for transfer of immovable property are debts subject to prescription. The court decli…

Source excerpt

• Abolition Of Racially Based Land Measures Act
• Prescription Act
• Transfer Of Immovable Property
• Personal Rights Vs Real Rights

Oreste v Devi and Another (17136/2007)

Oreste v Devi and Another (17136/2007) [2014] ZAGPJHC 60 (4 April 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

17136/2007

Judge

Wepener

The court held that the defendant's right to claim transfer of the immovable property under section 48(2) of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act is a personal right, not a real right. As such, it is subject to prescription under section 11(d) of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, which prescribes a three-year period. The defendant failed to effect transfer within the statutory period and did not apply for an extension. The Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court have authoritatively held that such claims constitute debts subject to prescription. The defendant's reliance o…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Abolition Of Racially Based Land Measures Act
• Transfer Of Immovable Property
• Personal Rights Vs Real Rights
• Vindication
• Registration Of Transfer

Balduzzi v Rajah (17136/2007)

Balduzzi v Rajah (17136/2007) [2014] ZAGPJHC 209 (4 April 2014)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

17136/2007

Judge

Wepener

The court held that the defendant's right to claim transfer of the immovable property under section 48(2) of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act is a personal right, not a real right. As such, it is subject to prescription under section 11(d) of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, which prescribes after three years. The defendant failed to effect transfer within the period prescribed by section 48(3)-(10) of the Abolition Act and did not apply to court for an extension. The authorities of the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court confirm that such claims are debts subjec…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Transfer Of Immovable Property
• Abolition Of Racially Based Land Measures Act
• Personal Rights Vs Real Rights

Balduzzi v Rajah (07/17136)

Balduzzi v Rajah (07/17136) [2008] ZAGPHC 110; [2008] 4 All SA 183 (W) (23 April 2008)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

07/17136

Judge

Berger

The High Court held that an eviction plea disclosed a defence because the occupier’s presence was not shown to be unlawful under PIE and eviction had to be just and equitable.

• Eviction
• Unlawful Occupation
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Alienation Of Land Act
• Abolition Of Racially Based Land Measures Act
• Unlawful-occupation