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
Land And Property [2024] ZAECMHC 20

Department of Economic Development and Environment Affairs v Boyana and Another (5123/2022)

Department of Economic Development and Environment Affairs v Boyana and Another (5123/2022) [2024] ZAECMHC 20 (23 April 2024)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Case number
5123/2022
Judge
L Rusi

The applicant established that the land in question falls within the protected coastal conservation area as defined by Decree 9 of 1992. The respondent failed to produce a valid permission to occupy or evidence of a lawful transfer of rights under Proclamation 26 of 1936. The affidavits and supporting documents provided by the respondent were insufficient, lacking confirmation from the Department of Agriculture or proper registration. The respondent's constitutional arguments were not properly pleaded and cannot be sustained. The applicant demonstrated a clear right to protect the conservatio…

Source excerpt

  • Coastal Conservation Area
  • Environmental Conservation Decree
  • Permission To Occupy
  • Final Interdict
  • Land Tenure
  • Constitutional Property Rights
Read case analysis
Land And Property [2007] ZASCA 95

Barnett and Others v Minister of Land Affairs and Others (304/06)

Barnett and Others v Minister of Land Affairs and Others (304/06) [2007] ZASCA 95; 2007 (6) SA 313 (SCA); 2007 (11) BCLR 1214 (SCA) (6 September 2007)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
304/06
Judges
Brand, Howie, Jafta, Maya, Combrinck

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants' occupation and construction of cottages on State land within the coastal conservation area was unlawful, as no valid consent or permit was obtained under the applicable statutory framework. The court found that the Government's claims were not prescribed, as the occupation constituted a continuous wrong, giving rise to ongoing actionable claims. The court rejected the appellants' reliance on informal rights and customary law, finding no evidence of a relevant custom or practice permitting non-residents to occupy the land. The court further…

Source excerpt

  • Coastal Conservation Area
  • Unlawful Occupation
  • Prescription Act
  • Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
  • Environmental Impact
  • Customary Law Permission
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.