Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional Law [2005] ZACC 9

Du Toit v Minister of Transport (CCT22/04)

Du Toit v Minister of Transport (CCT22/04) [2005] ZACC 9; 2005 (11) BCLR 1053 (CC); 2006 (1) SA 297 (CC) (8 September 2005)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT22/04
Judges
Mokgoro, Madala, Moseneke, Sachs, Skweyiya, Yacoob, Langa, Ngcobo, O'Regan, Van der Westhuizen

The Constitutional Court held that the correct approach to compensation for expropriation under the National Roads Act and Expropriation Act is to apply the statutory mechanism for compensation and then test the result against the constitutional standard of just and equitable compensation under section 25(3) of the Constitution. The Court found that what was expropriated was a temporary right to use the applicant's land to create a quarry and remove gravel for public road construction, not the gravel itself. Both the High Court and SCA were correct in applying section 12(1)(b) of the Expropri…

Source excerpt

  • Expropriation
  • Just And Equitable Compensation
  • Market Value
  • Actual Financial Loss
  • Interpretation Of Statutes
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
Read case analysis
Land And Property [2004] ZASCA 55

Minister of Transport v Du Toit (615/02)

Minister of Transport v Du Toit (615/02) [2004] ZASCA 55; [2004] 4 All SA 603 (SCA); 2005 (1) SA 16 (SCA); 2005 (10) BCLR 964 (SCA) (28 May 2004)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
615/02
Judges
Howie, Harms, Farlam, Cameron, Heher

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the expropriation was effected under s 8(1)(c) of the National Roads Act, authorizing only a temporary right to use the land for gravel extraction. Compensation is governed by s 12(1)(b) of the Expropriation Act, which limits recovery to actual financial loss suffered by the owner. The evidence did not establish that Du Toit suffered any actual financial loss, as the removal of gravel did not diminish his ability to exploit the remaining reserves for decades, and the market for gravel was artificially created by the project itself. The trial court erred i…

Source excerpt

  • Expropriation
  • Actual Financial Loss
  • Just And Equitable Compensation
  • National Roads Act
  • Expropriation Act
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
Read case analysis
Land And Property [1998] ZASCA 36

Kangra Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Water Affairs (626/95)

Kangra Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Water Affairs (626/95) [1998] ZASCA 36; 1998 (4) SA 330 (SCA); [1998] 3 All SA 227 (A) (22 May 1998)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
626/95
Judges
C T Howie, Mahomed, Eksteen, Streicher, Van Heerden

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's claim for compensation based on the present value of prospective profits from coal rights expropriated under the Water Act was not sustainable under s 12(1)(b) of the Expropriation Act. The court reasoned that only actual financial loss directly caused by expropriation is compensable, and indirect financial loss, including loss of prospective profits contingent on future exploitation and independent actions, is excluded by s 12(5)(e). The court found that the appellant's claimed losses were not directly caused by the expropriation but by n…

Source excerpt

  • Expropriation Act
  • Compensation For Expropriation
  • Actual Financial Loss
  • Market Value
  • Indirect Loss
  • Loss Of Profits
Read case analysis
Land And Property [1989] ZASCA 52

Davis and Another v Mayor and City Councillors of City of Pietermaritzburg (52/89)

Davis and Another v Mayor and City Councillors of City of Pietermaritzburg (52/89) [1989] ZASCA 52; [1989] 2 All SA 379 (A) (9 May 1989)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
52/89
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, Vivier, Steyn, Grosskopf

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the compensation for expropriated property must be determined by its market value at the date of notice, taking into account its potential for sectional title development but not the developer's profit that could have been realized had the development occurred. The developer's profit was already deducted in the market value calculation. The Court found that the alleged financial loss was not directly caused by the expropriation, as realization of the profit depended on independent actions and approvals by the appellants and third parties. Therefore, the a…

Source excerpt

  • Expropriation Act 1975
  • Compensation For Expropriation
  • Market Value Assessment
  • Actual Financial Loss
  • Causation In Expropriation
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.