Bela-Bela Municipality and Others v Bela-Bela VTS (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (10379/2023) [2024] ZALMPPHC 144 (11 October 2024)
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
10379/2023
Judge
N. Gaisa
The High Court granted leave to appeal against its review order concerning Bela-Bela Municipality’s refusal to support a vehicle testing station application.
Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse v Minister of Transport and Others (32097/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 1; 2022 (2) SA 566 (GP) (13 January 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
32097/2020
Judge
Basson
The court found that the AARTO Act and the Amendment Act unlawfully intrude upon the exclusive legislative and executive competence of provincial and local governments as set out in Schedule 5 of the Constitution. The Acts create a single national system for the administrative enforcement of road traffic laws, thereby usurping the powers reserved for provinces and municipalities. The court applied the 'bottom-up' approach endorsed by the Constitutional Court, carving out exclusive municipal and provincial competencies before considering national powers. The respondents failed to establish any…
Tronox KZN Sands (Pty) Ltd v KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Appeal Tribunal and Others (CCT114/15) [2016] ZACC 2; 2016 (4) BCLR 469 (CC); 2016 (3) SA 160 (CC) (29 January 2016)
Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT114/15
Judges
Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, Nkabinde J, Nugent AJ, Van der Westhuizen J, Zondo J
Section 45 of the KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Act 6 of 2008 is constitutionally invalid because it authorises provincial interference in municipal planning decisions, which are exclusively within the competence of municipalities under section 156(1) of the Constitution. The Appeal Tribunal, established by provincial legislation, subjects municipalities to an appeal process without their consent, thereby eroding municipal autonomy. The independence of the Tribunal and its expert composition do not cure the constitutional defect, as the power to manage municipal planning cannot be in…
Tronox KZN Sands (Pty) Ltd v KwaZulu-Natal Planning And Development Appeal Tribunal and Others (9645/14) [2015] ZAKZPHC 42 (3 June 2015)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
9645/14
Judge
Lopes
The court found that section 45 and Chapter 10 of the KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Act, 2008, impermissibly interfere with the constitutionally entrenched powers of municipalities by subjecting municipal planning decisions to appeal before a provincially appointed tribunal. This appellate structure usurps municipal autonomy and is indistinguishable from previously invalidated provincial appeal mechanisms. The Constitution allocates municipal planning as an exclusive municipal function, and provincial oversight through appeals is not justified by constitutional provisions supporting…
Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Western Cape v The Habitat Council and Others; Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, Western Cape v City of Cape Town and Others (117/13) [2014] ZACC 9; 2014 (5) BCLR 591 (CC); 2014 (4) SA 437 (CC) (4 April 2014)
Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 117/13
Judges
Moseneke, Skweyiya, Cameron, Dambuza, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Majiedt, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo
Section 44 of the Land Use Planning Ordinance 15 of 1985 is unconstitutional because it allows the provincial government to substitute its decisions for those of municipalities in land-use matters, thereby usurping the constitutionally entrenched powers of municipalities over municipal planning. The Constitution allocates zoning and subdivision decisions exclusively to municipalities, and provincial oversight is limited to monitoring, support, and the creation of norms and guidelines, not direct appellate intervention. The High Court's reading-in remedy, which sought to preserve some provinci…
Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning of the Western Cape v Lagoonbay Lifestyle Estate (Pty) Ltd and Others (CCT 41/13) [2013] ZACC 39; 2014 (1) SA 521 (CC); 2014 (2) BCLR 182 (CC) (20 November 2013)
The Constitutional Court held that Lagoonbay failed to directly challenge the constitutional validity of LUPO, and thus the Court was bound to determine the dispute on the basis that LUPO is constitutionally valid. Under LUPO, the Provincial Minister was competent to decide rezoning applications, as the relevant structure plan and statutory provisions did not exclude provincial authority where a state institution opposed the rezoning. However, regarding subdivision, the Scheme Regulations empowered the Municipality as the final decision-maker unless it elected not to exercise its power, which…
Habitat Council and Another v Provincial Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning in the Western Cape and Others; City of Cape Town v Provincial Minister of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning in the Western Cape and Others (6227/2013; 23061/2009) [2013] ZAWCHC 112; 2013 (6) SA 113 (WCC) (14 August 2013)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
6227/2013; 23061/2009
Judge
D M Davis
Section 44 of LUPO is inconsistent with the Constitution because it permits the provincial authority to override municipal planning decisions, thereby undermining the exclusive competence of municipalities in municipal planning matters as set out in the Constitution. The constitutional scheme requires a clear demarcation between municipal and provincial planning powers, with provincial oversight limited to ensuring effective municipal performance, not substituting municipal decisions. The Court accepted the parties' concession of invalidity and found that the over-broad powers conferred by se…
Premier, Western Cape v President of the Republic of South Africa and Another (CCT26/98) [1999] ZACC 2; 1999 (3) SA 657; 1999 (4) BCLR 383 (29 March 1999)
The Constitutional Court held that section 197(1) of the Constitution expressly empowers national legislation to determine the structure and functioning of the public service, including provincial administrations. The executive authority of provinces does not include an exclusive power to structure their own public service outside the framework set by national legislation. The Court found that the legislative scheme, as a whole, does not infringe the executive power or autonomy of provinces, nor does it encroach on their functional or institutional integrity as prohibited by section 41(1)(g)…
