South Africa Case Law

Singh obo Singh Family v Minister of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (LCC79/2023)

Singh obo Singh Family v Minister of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (LCC79/2023) [2025] ZALCC 29 (2 June 2025)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC79/2023

Judge

Meer

The Court found that the Singh family was dispossessed of their farms under the Group Areas Act, receiving compensation far below market value and suffering significant hardship. Credible evidence established that 156 hectares of Broughton were under irrigation at the time of dispossession, contrary to the Defendant's unreliable data. The Plaintiff's expert valuation, escalated using the Consumer Price Index and adjusted for solatium, was accepted, except for the inclusion of transfer duty, which was excluded as actual financial loss. Considering the stark discrepancy between historic and cur…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Group Areas Act Dispossession
• Valuation Of Agricultural Land
• Constitutional Redress
• Expert Evidence

Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another v Shah and Others (LCC93/2014 ; LCC180/2014)

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.

• Expropriation Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Solatium
• Financial Loss
• Section 25 Constitution
• Restitution Of Land Rights

Poti and Others v Minister of Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (205/2021; 19/2022)

Poti and Others v Minister of Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (205/2021; 19/2022) [2025] ZALCC 6 (21 January 2025)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

205/2021; 19/2022

Judge

Ncube

The Land Court set aside blanket R36,000 compensation awards for Veesplaas claimants, finding the RLCC relied on irrelevant factors and failed to assess individual circumstances.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Administrative Action Review
• Prescription
• Procedural Fairness
• Restitution-of-land-rights

Shoreline Auctioneers CC v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (38105/2017)

Shoreline Auctioneers CC v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (38105/2017) [2024] ZAGPJHC 464 (8 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

38105/2017

Judge

Flatela

The High Court granted leave to appeal in an expropriation compensation dispute, finding one ground had reasonable prospects of success.

• Expropriation Act 1975
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Leave To Appeal
• Market Value Determination
• Expropriation
• Leave-to-appeal

South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union v Massmart Holding Limited and Others (JA119/2022)

South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union v Massmart Holding Limited and Others (JA119/2022) [2024] ZALAC 13; (2024) 45 ILJ 1610 (LAC) (29 April 2024)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA119/2022

Judges

Waglay JP, Savage JA, Malindi AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that section 68(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act, as amended, confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Labour Court to order just and equitable compensation for losses attributable to unlawful conduct committed during any strike, whether protected or unprotected. The Court found that the reference to 'any conduct' in section 68(1) is not limited to conduct occurring in unprotected strikes but includes unlawful conduct during protected strikes. The immunity provided by section 67(2) and (6) does not extend to acts that constitute offences, as clarified by section 67(…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Protected Strike Immunity
• Unlawful Conduct During Strike
• Labour Relations Act Interpretation

EL IDZ Fibre Maintenance Venture v East London Industrial Development Zone Soc Ltd (EL395/2021)

EL IDZ Fibre Maintenance Venture v East London Industrial Development Zone Soc Ltd (EL395/2021) [2022] ZAECELLC 31 (22 November 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court

Case number

EL395/2021

Judge

Laing

The High Court refused leave to amend a review application, finding the proposed compensation and loss-of-profit claims unsupported, excipiable, and prejudicial.

• Tender Review
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Preferential Procurement
• B Bbee Scoring
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Exceptional Remedy Under Paja

Koloko N.O v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (LCC85/2020)

Koloko N.O v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (LCC85/2020) [2022] ZALCC 39 (16 November 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC85/2020

Judges

Y S Meer, S S Luthuli

The court found that the plaintiff, as executor and direct descendant of the dispossessed owner, had locus standi to claim restitution. Oral testimony and documentary evidence, including the will and sworn statements, established the necessary lineage despite the absence of an unabridged birth certificate. Expert valuers agreed that physical restoration of Portion 9 was feasible and would not unduly disrupt current farming operations. The court determined that the compensation received at the time of dispossession was inadequate and that the current value of just and equitable compensation wa…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Feasibility Of Restoration
• Locus Standi
• Racial Dispossession
• Valuation Of Expropriated Land

Malangane Community v Minister of Rural Development and Land Refor and Others (LCC 2012/117)

Malangane Community v Minister of Rural Development and Land Refor and Others (LCC 2012/117) [2022] ZALCC 19 (1 September 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 2012/117

Judge

Spilg

The fourth defendant, the Valuer General, failed to communicate its intention to change the basis of expert evidence until the eve of trial, despite being notified of the trial date well in advance. This conduct, whether due to indifference or negligence, undermined the purpose of case management and pretrial conferences, caused wasted costs, and prejudiced other parties, particularly those with limited resources. The explanation offered was inadequate and unsupported by affidavit or documentation. The court found that the fourth defendant was responsible for the wasted costs occasioned by th…

Source excerpt

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Punitive Costs
• Case Management
• Expert Evidence
• Postponement Of Trial

Adendorff N O and Another v Kubheka and Another (463/2020)

Adendorff N O and Another v Kubheka and Another (463/2020) [2022] ZASCA 29 (24 March 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

463/2020

Judges

Petse, Mbha, Carelse, Phatshoane, Molefe

The Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed Kubheka as a labour tenant, rejected the farmworker defence, and dismissed the appeal while directing a compensation process.

• Labour Tenant Definition
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Award Of Land
• Onus Of Proof
• Farmworker Exclusion
• Labour-tenant-definition

Sibanyoni v Holtzhauzen and Others (LCC143/2015)

Sibanyoni v Holtzhauzen and Others (LCC143/2015) [2022] ZALCC 2 (31 January 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC143/2015

Judge

MIA

Late expert evidence was rejected, and the Land Claims Court awarded compensation of R174,000 for six impounded cattle under ESTA.

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Just And Equitable Compensation
• Expert Evidence
• Valuation Of Livestock
• Extention-of-security-of-tenure-act
• Expert-evidence