South Africa Case Law

Philippi Horticultural Area Food & Farming Campaign and Another v MEC for Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Western Cape and Others (16779/17)

Philippi Horticultural Area Food & Farming Campaign and Another v MEC for Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning: Western Cape and Others (16779/17) [2020] ZAWCHC 8; 2020 (3) SA 486 (WCC) (17 February 2020)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16779/17

Judge

K M Savage

The court found that the Oakland land did not qualify as agricultural land under the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act, as it was not classified for agricultural use only and was situated within the jurisdiction of a municipal council. The 2011 urban edge decision was rendered moot by the adoption of the 2012 CTSDF, which was not challenged, and thus no practical effect would result from reviewing the earlier decision. The environmental authorisation and exemption granted for the Oakland City development were reviewed, with the court holding that relevant considerations regarding the impac…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Environmental Authorisation
• Spatial Planning
• Aquifer Impact Assessment
• Land Use Planning
• Procedural Fairness

Lemke NO and Another v Knysna Municipality and Another (21732/14)

Lemke NO and Another v Knysna Municipality and Another (21732/14) [2017] ZAWCHC 13 (8 February 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

21732/14

Judge

N P Boqwana

The Municipality's approval of the subdivision and building line departure was materially influenced by errors of law and procedure. The application for subdivision conflicted with Regulation 3.2.4 of the Knysna Zoning Scheme, as the new erf size was smaller than the sizes prior to consolidation, and no proper departure application was advertised or considered in terms of s 15(1)(b) of LUPO. The incorrect citation of statutory provisions and failure to alert decision-makers to the conflict with the zoning scheme regulations constituted material non-compliance with statutory requirements. Publ…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Administrative Action
• Land Use Planning
• Building Line Departure
• Public Participation
• Statutory Interpretation

Abrahamse v Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd and Others (21134/2015)

Abrahamse v Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd and Others (21134/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 186 (26 October 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

21134/2015

Judge

Canca

The court found that the City of Cape Town failed to consider the applicant's objection to the construction of the telecommunications base station, despite the regulatory framework and policies requiring all objections to be considered. The applicant was the most directly affected property owner, and his objection contained unique information not present in other objections. The City's omission violated the audi alteram partem principle and procedural fairness under PAJA, as well as its own policies and regulations. The court rejected MTN's argument that considering similar objections was unn…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Land Use Planning
• Minor Works Permit

Theron obo Wonderland Educare v City of Cape Town and Others (15000/2013)

Theron obo Wonderland Educare v City of Cape Town and Others (15000/2013) [2016] ZAWCHC 12 (19 February 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15000/2013

Judge

Koen

The Appeals committee failed to take a proper decision on the applicant's appeal under section 62 of the Municipal Systems Act, as evidenced by the transcript showing an equality of votes and no formal resolution. The common law rule applicable to meetings, where a deadlock results in the motion not being carried, does not apply to statutory appeals. Section 62 requires the appeal authority to actively decide the matter, not merely vote. The absence of a majority decision constitutes a reviewable irregularity under PAJA. The just and equitable remedy is to remit the matter for a hearing de no…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Municipal Systems Act
• Land Use Planning
• Review Of Administrative Action

Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality v Georgiou t/a Georgiou Guesthouse and Spa and Others (1663/2015)

Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality v Georgiou t/a Georgiou Guesthouse and Spa and Others (1663/2015) [2015] ZAECPEHC 59; [2016] 1 All SA 607 (ECP); 2016 (2) SA 394 (ECP) (20 October 2015)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

1663/2015

Judge

G Goosen

The court held that the conditional re-zoning of the properties, subject to the removal of restrictive conditions of title, was unlawful. The purported condition was not a lawful condition under section 42 of LUPO, as it did not relate to land use restrictions or development parameters but merely restated the legal position that restrictive conditions take precedence. The local authority is bound to consider and enforce restrictive conditions and cannot circumvent them by granting conditional re-zoning. The special consent granted to operate a licensed hotel and chapel was also unlawful, as n…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Land Use Planning
• Restrictive Conditions Of Title
• Zoning Scheme Regulations
• Special Consent Procedure
• Municipal Delegation Of Powers

Vermaak and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Others (224/2013)

Vermaak and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Others (224/2013) [2013] ZAECPEHC 36 (19 March 2013)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

224/2013

Judge

Goosen

The court upheld a non-joinder objection in an urgent wind-farm dispute, finding the MEC had to be joined before the appeal issue could be decided.

• Non Joinder
• Interim Interdict
• Environmental Authorisation
• Land Use Planning
• Right Of Appeal
• Urgency

Minister for Mineral Resources v Swartland Municipality and Others (CCT 102/11)

Minister for Mineral Resources v Swartland Municipality and Others (CCT 102/11) [2012] ZACC 8; 2012 (7) BCLR 712 (CC) (12 April 2012)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 102/11

Judges

Jafta, Mogoeng, Yacoob, Cameron, Froneman, Khampepe, Maya, Nkabinde, Skweyiya, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo

The Constitutional Court held that a mining right under the MPRDA does not replace LUPO zoning requirements. The appeal was dismissed and rezoning remained necessary.

• Land Use Planning
• Mining Rights
• Municipal Powers
• Rezoning
• Concurrent Jurisdiction
• Constitutional Competence

Eedendrop (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality (1774/2009)

Eedendrop (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality (1774/2009) [2010] ZAECPEHC 36 (22 June 2010)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

1774/2009

Judge

Sangoni

The court found that the agreement between the applicant and the respondent was invalid and of no force and effect due to material non-compliance with statutory requirements. Specifically, the parties failed to comply with the mandatory publication and tender procedures set out in sections 172 and 173 of the Municipal Ordinance, which are designed to ensure transparency and fairness in municipal contracting. The formula for repayment to the applicant via a share of rates was incompatible with section 229(1)(a) of the Constitution, which prohibits the allocation of municipal rates to private p…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Contracts
• Invalidity Due To Statutory Noncompliance
• Rates And Taxes
• Land Use Planning
• Procurement Regulation
• Budget Authorisation