South Africa Case Law

NAD Property Income Fund (Pty) Ltd v South African National Roads Agency Limited (2137/2020)

NAD Property Income Fund (Pty) Ltd v South African National Roads Agency Limited (2137/2020) [2024] ZALMPPHC 92 (7 August 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

2137/2020

Judge

Diamond

The court found that both NAD and SANRAL raised issues of law and procedure that have not been authoritatively determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal, particularly regarding the calculation of 'actual financial loss' in expropriation and the deviation from the statutory costs formula. The court held that these matters are of sufficient importance and complexity to warrant appellate review. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted to NAD on the compensation determination and to SANRAL on the costs order, with costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.

Source excerpt

• Expropriation Act
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Costs Orders
• Section 25 Constitution
• Leave To Appeal
• Judicial Discretion

Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v Premier of the Western Cape Province and Another (17531/2022)

Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v Premier of the Western Cape Province and Another (17531/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 308 (1 December 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

17531/2022

Judge

Jamie

The court held that the notices of expropriation, properly construed, included both the existing and new road reserves as expropriated property. The documents attached to the notices, other than the official notice and sketch plan, were not part of the statutory notice and could not be used to limit or interpret the extent of expropriation. The court rejected the defendants' argument that no compensation was payable for the existing road reserves, finding that the statutory and constitutional framework requires clarity and fairness in administrative action and compensation. The exception proc…

Source excerpt

• Expropriation
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Road Reserves
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Statutory Interpretation
• Pleading Exception

Business Venture Investments 900 (Pty) Ltd v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (20/28475)

Business Venture Investments 900 (Pty) Ltd v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (20/28475) [2021] ZAGPJHC 544 (13 October 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

20/28475

Judge

Molahlehi

The court held that section 10 of the Expropriation Act is intended to assist the owner in negotiations regarding compensation prior to the institution of litigation. Once the owner rejects the offer and institutes action proceedings under section 14, the process envisaged by section 10 ceases to apply. The respondent had already provided comprehensive reasons for the Nil compensation offer, and there was no obligation to provide further particulars. The applicant's remedy lies in pursuing the action proceedings to determine compensation, not in compelling further particulars under section 10.

Source excerpt

• Expropriation Act
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Reasonable Particulars
• Municipal Powers

Royal Square Investments 330 (Pty) Ltd v Premier, Western Cape and Another (A142/2020)

Royal Square Investments 330 (Pty) Ltd v Premier, Western Cape and Another (A142/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 68; [2021] 3 All SA 205 (WCC) (20 April 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A142/2020

Judges

Binns-Ward, Samela, Papier

The court held that the mere proclamation of a public road under the Divisional Councils Ordinance 1952 does not result in automatic expropriation or vesting of ownership in the road authority; actual acquisition requires a further act, such as purchase or expropriation, accompanied by compensation. Regulation 38 of the LUPO regulations is not applicable to land reserved for a proclaimed road, as its scheme is irreconcilable with the Roads Ordinance and Expropriation Act, which regulate the acquisition and compensation for land required for road purposes. The appellant failed to allege that t…

Source excerpt

• Road Proclamation
• Constructive Expropriation
• Lupon Regulation 38
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Property Clause Interpretation
• Statutory Interpretation

Kleinfontein Aandeleblok (Pty) Ltd v Zeevart (51715/2007)

Kleinfontein Aandeleblok (Pty) Ltd v Zeevart (51715/2007) [2020] ZAGPPHC 788 (29 December 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

51715/2007

Judge

N Janse van Nieuwenhuizen

The court held that interest was not a prerequisite for enforcing the eviction order, because the earlier order required payment of compensation only, not interest.

• Prescribed Rate Of Interest Act
• Eviction Order
• Interest On Unliquidated Debt
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Interest-on-unliquidated-debt
• Eviction-order

Van der Merwe v The Commission on Restitution of Land Rights and Others (LCC183/2016)

Van der Merwe v The Commission on Restitution of Land Rights and Others (LCC183/2016) [2018] ZALCC 27 (12 December 2018)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC183/2016

Judge

Meer

Review dismissed: the court found no evidence that the land claim dispossession resulted from a racially discriminatory law or practice.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Racial Dispossession
• Group Areas Act
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Restitution-of-land-rights

Burrie Smith Ontwikkelaars (Pty) Ltd v Rustenburg Local Municipality (2868/08)

Burrie Smith Ontwikkelaars (Pty) Ltd v Rustenburg Local Municipality (2868/08) [2017] ZANWHC 92 (17 August 2017)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

2868/08

Judge

DJAJE

The court found that the applicant's proposed amendment does not introduce a new cause of action but rather clarifies the factors to be considered in determining compensation for expropriated land, in line with both section 12 of the Expropriation Act and section 25(3) of the Constitution. The five factors listed in section 25(3) are allegations of fact that can be proven with evidence, and the applicant is not precluded from producing such evidence. The amendment does not render the particulars of claim vague or embarrassing, nor does it prejudice the respondent, who retains the opportunity…

Source excerpt

• Expropriation
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Section 25 Constitution
• Section 12 Expropriation Act

Rand Water Board v Big Cedar Trading 22 (Pty) Ltd (1038/15)

Rand Water Board v Big Cedar Trading 22 (Pty) Ltd (1038/15) [2016] ZASCA 177; [2017] 1 All SA 698 (SCA) (25 November 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1038/15

Judges

Cachalia, Seriti, Wallis, Pillay, Schippers

The SCA held that Rand Water lawfully laid pipelines under statute, even without a registered servitude, and that the new owner could not demand removal or compensation.

• Statutory Pipe Laying Powers
• Servitude Registration
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Constitutional Property Rights
• Statutory-powers
• Servitudes

Kleinfontein Boerebelange Koopertief Beperk v Zeevaart (A912/2014)

Kleinfontein Boerebelange Koopertief Beperk v Zeevaart (A912/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 645 (29 July 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A912/2014

Judges

C.P. Rabie, Molopa, Mabuse

Appeal against refusal of sequestration dismissed, as the respondent was not factually insolvent and sequestration was sought to bypass a compensation protection order.

• Sequestration
• Discretion Of Court
• Costs Orders
• Right To Housing
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Insolvency

Bezuidenhout v Mogale City Local Municipality (50913/13)

Bezuidenhout v Mogale City Local Municipality (50913/13) [2014] ZAGPPHC 589 (15 August 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

50913/13

Judge

BAM

The High Court allowed an amendment to the applicant’s notice of motion to add alternative relief under the Expropriation Act and reserved costs.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Expropriation Act
• Local Government Ordinance
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Amendment-of-pleadings
• Expropriation-act