South Africa Case Law

Dangazele and Others v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others; Mpetsheni and Others v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others; Nkolisa v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others (LCC16/2022;LCC17/2022;LCC18/2022)

Dangazele and Others v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others; Mpetsheni and Others v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others; Nkolisa v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and Others (LCC16/2022;LCC17/2022;LCC18/2022) [2022] ZALCC 28 (20 October 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC16/2022;LCC17/2022;LCC18/2022

Judges

S J Cowen, Y S Meer

The Court found that the applicants, both as individuals and as the Vulamasango Singene Campaign, have standing to seek relief regarding 'betterment' claims, as they are directly affected by the Commission's prior conduct and the statutory scheme. However, the Court held that it is not competent to grant relief for claims not yet lodged, as its jurisdiction is limited by the Restitution Act and Constitutional Court orders, and reopening claims is a matter for the legislature. Regarding the processing of preserved 'betterment' claims lodged between 1 July 2014 and 28 July 2016 in the former Tr…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Betterment Schemes
• Standing
• Processing Of Preserved Claims
• Constitutional Rights To Land
• Administrative Procedure

Crouse NO and Another v Workers Union of South Africa (CA1/2006)

Crouse NO and Another v Workers Union of South Africa (CA1/2006) [2008] ZALCCT 6 (19 May 2008)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

CA1/2006

Judges

Davis, Zondo, Tlaletsi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Registrar’s refusal to register a union was not a final appealable decision because section 96 procedures were not followed.

• Trade Union Registration
• Labour Relations Act
• Administrative Procedure
• Appeal Jurisdiction
• Trade-union-registration
• Labour-relations-act

Crouse N.O and Another v Workers Union of South Africa (CA1/2006)

Crouse N.O and Another v Workers Union of South Africa (CA1/2006) [2008] ZALAC 5; [2008] 10 BLLR 919 (LAC); (2008) 29 ILJ 2571 (LAC) (19 May 2008)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

CA1/2006

Judges

Davis JA, Zondo JP, Tlaletsi AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Registrar’s refusal to register a union was not final because section 96 procedures were not followed, and referred the matter back.

• Registration Of Trade Unions
• Genuine Trade Union Requirement
• Administrative Procedure
• Appeal Procedure Under Lra
• Trade-union-registration
• Labour-relations-act

East Zulu Motors (Proprietary) Limited v Empangeni/Ngwelezane Transitional Local Council and Others (CCT44/96)

East Zulu Motors (Proprietary) Limited v Empangeni/Ngwelezane Transitional Local Council and Others (CCT44/96) [1997] ZACC 19; 1998 (1) BCLR 1; 1998 (2) SA 61 (4 December 1997)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT44/96

Judges

Madala, Chaskalson, Langa, Mokgoro, Sachs, O'Regan, Ackermann, Goldstone, Kriegler

The Constitutional Court held that the differentiation in the Town Planning Ordinance between applicants and objectors regarding rights of appeal is rationally connected to the distinct procedures and functions of exempted and non-exempted local authorities. The Ordinance provides that applicants may appeal when their application is refused by a non-exempted local authority, as this is a final decision, whereas objectors' representations are considered by the Commission before any amendment is approved. The procedures applicable to exempted and non-exempted local authorities are rationally re…

Source excerpt

• Equality Clause
• Town Planning Ordinance
• Right Of Appeal
• Administrative Procedure
• Constitutional Invalidity

M & J Morgan Investments (Pty) Ltd. and Another v Pinetown Municipality and Others (422/95)

M & J Morgan Investments (Pty) Ltd. and Another v Pinetown Municipality and Others (422/95) [1997] ZASCA 60; 1997 (4) SA 427 (SCA); [1997] 3 All SA 280 (A); (30 May 1997)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

422/95

Judges

Olivier, Van Heerden, Howie, Scott, Zulman

The court upheld a municipal expropriation process for road widening, finding the original resolution valid, no new resolution needed for a reduced area, and no audi or environmental breach.

• Expropriation
• Local Authorities Ordinance
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Environmental Rights
• Administrative Procedure
• Municipal-law

Blue Grass Estates (Pty) Ltd. en Andere v Minister van Landbou en Andere (279/90)

Blue Grass Estates (Pty) Ltd. en Andere v Minister van Landbou en Andere (279/90) [1991] ZASCA 119; 1992 (4) SA 406 (AD); [1991] 1 All SA 319 (A) ; [1992] 1 All SA 215 (A) (24 September 1991)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

279/90

Judges

E M Grosskopf, Smalberger, Milne, F H G Grosskopf, Van Coller

The court held that the levies imposed by the Dairy Board under Government Notice R300 were ultra vires because the necessary decisions and approvals were taken before the amendments to the scheme (which authorised such levies) came into force. The enabling statute and scheme did not permit retrospective authorisation, and the simultaneous publication of the amendments and levies could not cure the prior lack of authority. Only those levies specifically dependent on the new authorisation were invalid; valid levies in the same notice were not affected. The Board's method of decision-making by…

Source excerpt

• Ultra Vires
• Statutory Interpretation
• Administrative Procedure
• Levies And Taxes