South Africa Case Law

City of Cape Town v Those persons attempting and/or intending to settle on the erven in District Six the details of which are identified in Annexure A to notice of motion (7349/2021)

City of Cape Town v Those persons attempting and/or intending to settle on the erven in District Six the details of which are identified in Annexure A to notice of motion (7349/2021) [2021] ZAWCHC 98 (19 May 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7349/2021

Judge

J Cloete

The High Court confirmed an interdict protecting District Six properties from unlawful occupation, holding that the City had a clear right and no adequate alternative remedy.

• Unlawful Occupation
• Land Restitution
• Interdict
• Group Areas Act
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction
• Constitutional Rights

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

Rajah and Another v Balduzzi (076/2017)

Rajah and Another v Balduzzi (076/2017) [2018] ZASCA 57 (16 May 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

076/2017

Judges

Navsa, Leach, Wallis, Mothle, Hughes

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the claim for transfer of the property by the estate was not properly adjudicated under the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act, but rather fell under section 3 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, which provides a remedy for persons prevented from acquiring title due to racially discriminatory laws. The Land Claims Court has exclusive jurisdiction over such claims, and the High Court orders upholding prescription and res judicata were made without jurisdiction and on an incorrect legislative basis. The application for condonation for late fil…

Source excerpt

• Group Areas Act
• Nominee Ownership
• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Prescription
• Eviction
• Section 26 Constitution

Regional Land Claims Commissioner and Others v Jazz Spirit 12 (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC26/10)

Regional Land Claims Commissioner and Others v Jazz Spirit 12 (Pty) Ltd and Others (LCC26/10) [2012] ZALCC 17 (7 December 2012)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC26/10

Judge

Mpshe AJ

The Land Claims Court held that the Sadien family was dispossessed by racially discriminatory land laws and ordered transfer of alternative state land.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Group Areas Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Statutory Interpretation
• Prescription Act
• Alternative Redress

Banderker N.O and Others v Gangrakar N.O and Others (A359/06)

Banderker N.O and Others v Gangrakar N.O and Others (A359/06) [2008] ZAWCHC 10; 2008 (4) SA 269 (C) (22 February 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A359/06

Judges

Zondi, NC Erasmus, Veldhuizen

The court held that prescription did not run while the claimant and executor of the estate were the same person, so the claimed share in the property had not prescribed.

• Prescription Act
• Executor And Beneficiary Conflict
• Group Areas Act
• Liquidation And Distribution Account
• Prescription
• Estate-administration

Pillay and Others (LCC1/99)

Pillay and Others (LCC1/99) [2004] ZALCC 16 (13 September 2004)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 1/99

Judges

Moloto, Stephenson

The Land Claims Court held that Mr Pillay’s 1958 sale of land in Cato Manor was a dispossession caused by racially discriminatory laws and practices.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Group Areas Act
• Dispossession
• Equitable Redress
• Restitution-of-land-rights
• Group-areas-act

Abrams v Allie NO and Others (114/03)

Abrams v Allie NO and Others (114/03) [2004] ZASCA 13; [2004] 2 All SA 99 (SCA); 2004 (9) BCLR 914 (SCA); 2004 (4) SA 534 (SCA) (26 March 2004)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

114/03

Judges

Howie P, Scott JA, Farlam JA, Lewis JA, Ponnan AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Mahatey was dispossessed of the property due to the operation of racially discriminatory laws, specifically the Group Areas Act and Community Development Act. However, the compensation paid to Mahatey at the time of dispossession was found to be equivalent to market value, with the difference being less than two percent. Given the inherent imprecision in market value determinations, the court concluded that Mahatey received just and equitable compensation as contemplated by section 25(3) of the Constitution and section 2(2) of the Restitution of Land Righ…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Group Areas Act
• Market Value Determination
• Racial Discrimination
• Expropriation

Kara NO and Others v Department of Land Affairs (LCC44/98)

Kara NO and Others v Department of Land Affairs (LCC44/98) [2003] ZALCC 10; 2005 (6) SA 563 (LCC) (15 April 2003)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC44/98

Judges

Meer, Gildenhuys

The court found that, despite the applicants' failure to apply for postponement timeously, fundamental fairness and justice justified granting the postponement due to the complexity and significance of expert valuation evidence in land claims. The prejudice to the respondent could be compensated by an appropriate order for wasted costs. The court expressed displeasure at the late application and warned that future late applications for postponement would be less favourably considered, given the logistical challenges and operational constraints of the Land Claims Court, especially for hearings…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Postponement Of Trial
• Wasted Costs
• Expert Evidence
• Group Areas Act

Minister of Land Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Slamdien and Others (LCC107/98)

Minister of Land Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Slamdien and Others (LCC107/98) [1999] ZALCC 6 (10 February 1999)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC107/98

Judges

Dodson, Meer

The court held that the sale of the property was not a dispossession caused by a racially discriminatory law or practice, so restitution was barred.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Group Areas Act
• Causation In Statutory Interpretation
• Racially Discriminatory Laws
• Purposive Interpretation
• Constitutional Property Rights

Essop v Abdulah (266/1986)

Essop v Abdulah (266/1986) [1987] ZASCA 103 (25 September 1987)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

266/1986

Judges

Rabie, Joubert, Viljoen, Botha, Jacobs

The court dismissed an appeal against refusal of an interim interdict over group area properties, holding the claimed arrangement was unenforceable while the appellant lacked a permit.

• Group Areas Act
• Illegality Of Contract
• Interim Interdict
• Specific Performance
• Group-areas-act
• Interim-interdict