South Africa Case Law

Hetherington and Others v Boat House Langebaan (Pty) Ltd and Another (15777/2022)

Hetherington and Others v Boat House Langebaan (Pty) Ltd and Another (15777/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 132 (24 May 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15777/2022

Judge

Meer

The court found that the First Respondent's use of the property for short-term rentals, events, and commercial activities is unlawful and in contravention of the Saldanha Bay Municipal Integrated Zoning Scheme By-Law. The zoning scheme provides for specific primary and consent uses, and the activities conducted by the First Respondent fall outside these permitted uses. The scheme's definitions of 'dwelling house', 'dwelling unit', and 'family' do not accommodate the commercial and transient uses described. The Respondent's argument that any use not expressly prohibited is permitted was reject…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Zoning Scheme
• Unlawful Land Use
• Interdictory Relief
• Spatial Planning And Land Use Management Act
• Nuisance
• Consent Use

Esquire Consulting and Marketing CC and Others v Sea Glades Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (1315/2016)

Esquire Consulting and Marketing CC and Others v Sea Glades Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (1315/2016) [2017] ZASCA 167 (30 November 2017)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1315/2016

Judges

Ponnan, Bosielo, Leach, Mathopo, Ploos van Amstel

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that erf 3306 was validly rezoned for business use and that LUPO’s two-year utilisation period did not bar a restaurant.

• Land Use Planning Ordinance
• Rezoning And Subdivision
• Municipal Zoning Scheme
• Interdict
• Utilisation Period
• Principle Of Legality

Camps Bay Ratepayers' and Residents' Association and Another v Harrison and Another (560/08)

Camps Bay Ratepayers' and Residents' Association and Another v Harrison and Another (560/08) [2010] ZASCA 3; [2010] 2 All SA 519 (SCA) (17 February 2010)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

560/08

Judges

NAVSA, NUGENT, VAN HEERDEN, MLAMBO, MAYA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the municipality's approval of the building plan complied with all relevant statutory and zoning requirements. The court found that the approval process was procedurally fair, with all necessary protocols observed and due regard paid to the appellants' objections. The approval of the plan as a 'rider' to the original plan was lawful under the Building Standards Act and associated regulations. The alleged contraventions of title deed conditions and height restrictions were not substantiated on the evidence, as the plan did not permit any unlawful structure…

Source excerpt

• Building Plan Approval
• Restrictive Title Deed Conditions
• Municipal Zoning Scheme
• Procedural Fairness
• Judicial Review Delay
• Height And Setback Restrictions