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
1 court collection
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative Law [2010] ZAWT 2

Pukka Chukka Farms CC v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT12/10/2009)

Pukka Chukka Farms CC v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT12/10/2009) [2010] ZAWT 2 (17 May 2010)

The Water Tribunal dismissed an appeal against refusal of a Stream Flow Reduction Activity licence for commercial afforestation in the Matikulu River catchment.

  • Water Use Licensing
  • Stream Flow Reduction Activity
  • National Water Act
  • Administrative Fairness
  • Water-use-licensing
  • Stream-flow-reduction-activity
Read case analysis
Environmental Law [2009] ZAWT 20

Jarrett Pech Trust v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT21/09/2006)

Jarrett Pech Trust v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT21/09/2006) [2009] ZAWT 20 (23 December 2009)

The Water Tribunal held that the appellant’s eucalyptus plantation was a forest/afforestation and a stream flow reduction activity requiring a licence.

  • National Water Act
  • Stream Flow Reduction Activity
  • Afforestation
  • Water Use Licence
  • National Forests Act
  • Stream-flow-reduction-activity
Read case analysis
Environmental Law [2009] ZAWT 5

Champagne Falls (Pty) Limited v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT28/08/2006)

Champagne Falls (Pty) Limited v Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (WT28/08/2006) [2009] ZAWT 5 (17 November 2009)

The Tribunal found no direct evidence that the appellant's afforestation was established for commercial purposes. The respondent's reliance on the size of the plantation was insufficient to infer commercial intent, as the evidence was equally consistent with soil stabilization. Without commercial purpose, the activity does not constitute a water use as defined by section 21 of the National Water Act and thus does not require authorisation under section 22. The Tribunal, acting within its statutory powers, concluded that the directive issued against the appellant was not lawfully justified and…

  • National Water Act
  • Stream Flow Reduction Activity
  • Afforestation
  • Statutory Powers
  • Jurisdiction Of Tribunal
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.