Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another v Shah and Others (LCC93/2014 ; LCC180/2014) [2025] ZALCC 19 (9 May 2025)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC93/2014 ; LCC180/2014
Judge
Ncube
The Land Court granted leave to appeal only on solatium and financial loss, but refused it on the valuation issue in a land restitution compensation dispute.
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.
Summer Season Trading 63 (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (22557/2015; 25597/2011) [2024] ZAGPPHC 249 (11 March 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
22557/2015; 25597/2011
Judge
Omphemetse Mooki
The High Court dismissed both parties’ applications for leave to appeal in a land, eviction and expropriation dispute, and ordered costs against the respondents.
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.
Summer Season Trading 63 (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane metropolitan Municipality and Others (22557/2015) [2021] ZAGPPHC 45 (1 February 2021)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
22557/2015
Judge
Basson
The court allowed an amendment to a review application so the applicant could challenge a later expropriation notice involving the same property and parties.
Sanlucar de Hoek (Pty) Ltd and Another v Frantz and Others (LCC122/2009) [2020] ZALCC 26 (15 June 2020)
Court
Land Claims Court
Case number
LCC 122/2009
Judge
Canca
The Land Claims Court has jurisdiction under the Vexatious Proceedings Act to regulate its own process and to interdict persistent, groundless litigation. Mr. Christo Frantz and the Saron Forum have not demonstrated authority or mandate to represent the Saron Community in land claims, as the Section 10(4) committee is the only lawfully constituted body for this purpose. Frantz's repeated applications are frivolous, lack merit, and constitute an abuse of court process. The 24 Rivers Mission Station Traditional Authority has no statutory power to expropriate property under the Expropriation Act…
Dlamini v Kwadukuza Local Municipality and Others (D12577/2016) [2019] ZAKZPHC 55 (26 July 2019)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
D12577/2016
Judge
Mnguni
The applicant failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the delay in bringing the review application, which exceeded the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA. The court found that the applicant was aware of the expropriation and its procedural defects well before the date he claimed, and did not act with the required urgency. As the delay was not satisfactorily explained, the court declined to condone the late filing and found it unnecessary to consider the merits of the review application. The point in limine regarding the answering affidavit was rejected, as the c…
Staufen Investments (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Public Works and Others (756/2017) [2018] ZAECPEHC 51; 2019 (2) SA 295 (ECP); [2019] 2 All SA 258 (ECP) (25 September 2018)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Case number
756/2017
Judge
E Revelas
The court held that the Minister's decision to expropriate rights over the applicant's property in favour of Eskom constituted administrative action that was lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair. The expropriation served a legitimate public purpose by safeguarding electricity supply to a wide area, and regularising Eskom's occupation enhanced the electricity infrastructure in the national interest. The applicant's proposal to relocate the substation was found to be impractical and excessively costly, with significant risk of disruption to electricity supply. The court found no evidence o…
Solid Base Trading 121 CC (Pty) Ltd v City of Matlosana Local Municipality (1741/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1155 (8 November 2017)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
1741/2015
Judge
S.A.M. Baqwa
High Court expropriation case on just and equitable compensation for land affected by an Eskom servitude, with prior payments and costs also considered.
