South Africa Case Law

Joubert N.O.and Others v Xacto (Pty) Ltd and Others (547/2021)

Joubert N.O.and Others v Xacto (Pty) Ltd and Others (547/2021) [2023] ZANCHC 17 (21 April 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

547/2021

Judge

Williams

The court found that the Riversdale Trust, through its trustees, engaged in prohibited actions under section 3 of the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act by entering into lease agreements with occupiers for portions of agricultural land without Ministerial consent. The agreements, which included terms for long-term leases and the sale of shares linked to land occupation, constituted subdivision and contravened the Act. The arrangements also amounted to the unlawful establishment of a township, as evidenced by the creation of multiple residential units, supporting infrastructure, and the exer…

Source excerpt

• Subdivision Of Agricultural Land Act
• Township Establishment
• Spatial Planning Land Use Management Act
• Municipal Planning
• Illegal Land Use
• Lease Agreements

Kwadukuza Municipality v Mahomedy and Others (5189/2020P)

Kwadukuza Municipality v Mahomedy and Others (5189/2020P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 32 (17 March 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

5189/2020P

Judge

Koen

The court granted interdictory, demolition, and remediation relief against property owners for unlawful structures, impermissible vehicle repairs, and pollution.

• Illegal Land Use
• Building Regulations
• Environmental Pollution
• Municipal By Laws
• Nuisance
• Demolition Orders

Jacobs and Others v Buschow and Others (2021/2022)

Jacobs and Others v Buschow and Others (2021/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 338 (28 November 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2021/2022

Judge

P.E. Molitsoane

The court found that the respondents were unlawfully permitting the operation of a frail care facility on property zoned 'Single Residential 2', in contravention of the Bloemfontein Town Planning Scheme. The applicants, as neighbouring property owners, have locus standi to enforce compliance with the zoning scheme. Non-joinder of residents and Tree Tops (Pty) Ltd was not fatal, as neither had a direct and substantial interest prejudicially affected by the relief sought, which was not eviction but restraint of unlawful business use. The pending re-zoning application did not legalize current us…

Source excerpt

• Town Planning Scheme
• Final Interdict
• Zoning Restrictions
• Locus Standi
• Non Joinder
• Illegal Land Use

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Zibi and Another (234/2020)

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v Zibi and Another (234/2020) [2021] ZASCA 97; [2021] 3 All SA 667 (SCA); 2021 (6) SA 100 (SCA) (9 July 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

234/2020

Judges

Saldulker, Mbha, Schippers, Carelse, Poyo-Dlwati

The majority held that the municipality was entitled to impose a penalty tariff for illegal or unauthorised use of property in terms of its validly adopted property rates policy, without first re-categorising the property on the valuation roll. The penalty tariff is directed at unlawful conduct and is necessary and incidental to the effective performance of municipal functions. The relevant policy provisions and enabling legislation support the municipality's power to levy such penalties, and the respondents' conduct constituted clear jurisdictional facts for the application of the penalty ta…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Property Rates Act
• Differential Rates
• Illegal Land Use
• Penalty Tariffs
• Local Government Powers

Horn v Ceronio N.O and Others (3395/2020)

Horn v Ceronio N.O and Others (3395/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 101 (6 May 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3395/2020

Judge

N.S. Daniso

The court granted a final interdict restraining unlawful business use of property zoned for limited uses under the Bainsvlei Town Planning Scheme.

• Town Planning Scheme
• Zoning Enforcement
• Final Interdict
• Municipal Powers
• Illegal Land Use
• Final-interdict

McKay and Others v Ursiweb (Proprietary) Ltd and Others (3510/2019)

McKay and Others v Ursiweb (Proprietary) Ltd and Others (3510/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 232 (5 December 2019)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3510/2019

Judge

M.A. Mathebula

The court found that the respondents' use of the property for business purposes was in clear contravention of restrictive title conditions and the township scheme, which require residential use only. The applicants, as residents and property owners in the suburb, possess sufficient locus standi to enforce these restrictions, as the scheme was enacted for the benefit of the community, not just property owners. The respondents' arguments regarding proximity and the third applicant's lack of ownership were rejected; standing extends to those with a protectable interest, including residents. The…

Source excerpt

• Restrictive Conditions
• Town Planning Scheme
• Locus Standi
• Final Interdict
• Illegal Land Use

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Nkosi and Another (13191/17)

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Nkosi and Another (13191/17) [2019] ZAGPJHC 238 (4 June 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13191/17

Judge

TJB Bokaba

The High Court granted a final interdict stopping the respondents from using residential property as boarding rooms or lodging contrary to the town planning scheme.

• Town Planning Scheme
• Illegal Land Use
• Final Interdict
• Municipal Enforcement
• Town-planning-scheme
• Illegal-land-use

Du Toit N.O. and Others v Coenoe 90 CC and Others (1584/2017)

Du Toit N.O. and Others v Coenoe 90 CC and Others (1584/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 126 (2 August 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1584/2017

Judge

J.J.F. Hefer

The court found that the operation of Pandora's Guesthouse on a property zoned for single residential use was unlawful, as no formal consent had been granted by the municipality and informal consent from officials did not suffice under the relevant ordinances. The applicants, as affected owners and residents, had locus standi to seek an interdict without needing to prove special damage. The court held that the requirements for a final interdict were met, as the applicants had a clear right to enforce compliance with the zoning scheme, the unlawful use was ongoing, and no adequate alternative…

Source excerpt

• Town Planning Scheme
• Illegal Land Use
• Interdict Requirements
• Locus Standi
• Municipal Zoning
• Special Consent Application