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 [2020] ZAECGHC 45

Herbert NO and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (2457/2016)

Herbert NO and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (2457/2016) [2020] ZAECGHC 45 (19 May 2020)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
2457/2016
Judge
Roberson

The court found that the Trust and its predecessors were not the targets of racially discriminatory legislation and did not suffer dispossession or denial of access to land. Instead, they benefited from the system, occupying land for profit and facilitating migrant labour. The purpose of the Upgrading Act, as established by Constitutional Court authority, is to provide secure tenure and redress to Africans disadvantaged by apartheid-era laws. The Trust does not fall within the class of persons for whom the Act was enacted. Accordingly, the Trust is not entitled to claim conversion of its perm…

Source excerpt

  • Upgrading Of Land Tenure Rights Act
  • Constitutional Redress
  • Tenure Conversion
  • Discriminatory Legislation
  • Section 25 Property Rights
  • Equality Before Law
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2019] ZACC 31

Herbert N.O. and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (CCT 308/18)

Herbert N.O. and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (CCT 308/18) [2019] ZACC 31; 2019 (11) BCLR 1343 (CC); 2019 (6) SA 231 (CC) (22 August 2019)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 308/18
Judges
Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Ledwaba, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Nicholls, Theron

The Constitutional Court confirmed the High Court's declaration that section 1 of the Land Affairs General Amendment Act 61 of 1998 and section 25A of the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act 112 of 1991 are inconsistent with section 9(1) of the Constitution to the extent that they exclude section 3 from applying to the entire Republic. The Court found that the differentiation created by these provisions is irrational, perpetuates the discriminatory effects of apartheid, and unjustifiably limits the right to equality before the law. No legitimate government purpose was advanced to justify the…

Source excerpt

  • Equality Before The Law
  • Land Tenure Reform
  • Discriminatory Legislation
  • Constitutional Invalidity
  • Remedial Orders
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.