South Africa Case Law

Nunostax (Pty) Ltd and Another v Docrat and Others (A2024/046516)

Nunostax (Pty) Ltd and Another v Docrat and Others (A2024/046516) [2025] ZAGPJHC 242 (4 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2024/046516

Judges

Twala, Mahosi, Allen

The court found that the respondents failed to exhaust alternative remedies by not approaching the City of Johannesburg, the entity responsible for enforcing municipal by-laws regarding noise and building encroachment. The noise report relied upon by the respondents was not applicable to the business premises, as the relevant regulations pertain only to workplace environments. The respondents did not provide evidence of building plan transgressions or personal wrongdoing by the second appellant. The three requisites for a final interdict were not satisfied, particularly the absence of a satis…

Source excerpt

• Final Interdict
• Noise Nuisance
• Building Encroachment
• Exhaustion Of Alternative Remedies
• Municipal By Laws
• Occupational Health And Safety

University of Pretoria v Roger and Others (61693/2019)

University of Pretoria v Roger and Others (61693/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1834 (24 October 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

61693/2019

Judge

Swanepoel

The High Court dismissed leave to appeal against findings that entertainment breached the town planning scheme and that a landlord had to act against unlawful tenant conduct.

• Town Planning Scheme
• Noise Nuisance
• Leave To Appeal
• Landlord Liability
• Town-planning-scheme
• Landlord-liability

University of Pretoria v Roger and Others (61693/2019)

University of Pretoria v Roger and Others (61693/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1203 (18 September 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

61693/2019

Judge

Swanepoel

The High Court restricted bars near the University of Pretoria from operating outside land-use rights and granted relief against nuisance and unlawful use.

• Noise Nuisance
• Land Use Rights
• Interdict
• Liquor Licensing
• Landlord Liability
• Town Planning Scheme

Labuschagne and Another v Global Air Brakes CC and Another (5539/2019)

Labuschagne and Another v Global Air Brakes CC and Another (5539/2019) [2022] ZAGPJHC 597 (25 August 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

5539/2019

Judge

Bester

The court found that the first respondent's use of the property as a motor workshop is expressly excluded under the applicable zoning scheme and constitutes an unlawful use. The noise generated by the first respondent's activities was found to be excessive and unreasonable, interfering with the applicants' use and enjoyment of their property. The requirements for a final interdict were satisfied, and the applicants were entitled to an order prohibiting the unlawful use and excessive noise. The application for a demolition order was refused, as only the municipality or minister may seek such r…

Source excerpt

• Zoning Scheme Interpretation
• Noise Nuisance
• Building Regulations
• Interdict
• Review Of Administrative Action

Christopher v Verster and Others (9001/2020)

Christopher v Verster and Others (9001/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 114 (4 June 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

9001/2020

Judge

Henney

The court found that while the respondents' business technically qualifies as a home occupation under the DMS, they contravened specific provisions by exceeding the permitted area and operating hours. The respondents also breached the Animal By-law by keeping more than six dogs over six months without a permit and allowing barking beyond prescribed limits. The evidence established that the noise generated by Puppy Town was continuous, repetitive, and materially interfered with the applicant's use and enjoyment of his property, constituting a common law nuisance. The applicant's complaints to…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Planning By Law
• Noise Nuisance
• Common Law Nuisance
• Animal By Law
• Interdictory Relief

Van der Merwe and Others v Drenched Boxing (Pty) Ltd and Others (19222/2020)

Van der Merwe and Others v Drenched Boxing (Pty) Ltd and Others (19222/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 93; [2021] 3 All SA 281 (WCC) (5 May 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

19222/2020

Judge

Mangcu-Lockwood

High Court noise nuisance case dismissed for lack of a final interdict, after factual disputes and mitigation efforts could not be resolved on affidavit.

• Noise Nuisance
• Final Interdict
• Common Law Nuisance
• Western Cape Noise Control Regulations
• Dispute Of Fact
• Alternative Remedy

Foster v Kirst (8526/2019)

Foster v Kirst (8526/2019) [2020] ZAWCHC 93 (1 July 2020)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8526/2019

Judge

Slingers

The High Court dismissed both a rescission bid and a contempt application arising from a neighbour noise dispute and final interdict.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Contempt Of Court
• Noise Nuisance
• Default Judgment
• Common Law Nuisance
• Rescission-of-judgment

Wings Park Port Elizabeth (Pty) Ltd v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Economic Development Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Eastern Cape and Others (3172/2018)

Wings Park Port Elizabeth (Pty) Ltd v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Economic Development Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Eastern Cape and Others (3172/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 123 (12 November 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

3172/2018

Judge

O.H. Ronaasen

The court found that the applicant failed to institute review proceedings within the prescribed 180-day period under section 7(1) of PAJA, and the delay was per se unreasonable. The applicant did not provide a full and reasonable explanation for the delay, as it was always aware of both the initial and appeal decisions and their reasons. The court held that the interests of justice did not require condonation, given the applicant's conduct and failure to broaden the scope of the first application. On the merits, the court found that the administrative decisions were made in good faith, with d…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Environmental Authorisation
• Judicial Deference
• Delay In Review
• Public Participation
• Noise Nuisance

King Country Investment (Pty) Ltd v Cape Town Ziplines (Pty) Ltd and Others (6661/16)

King Country Investment (Pty) Ltd v Cape Town Ziplines (Pty) Ltd and Others (6661/16) [2016] ZAWCHC 126 (23 September 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6661/16

Judge

Rogers

The High Court declared a zipline operation unlawful under zoning rules and granted a final interdict, with a short delay before it took effect.

• Zoning Regulations
• Municipal Planning By Law
• Tourist Facilities Consent Use
• Noise Nuisance
• Final Interdict
• Alternative Remedy

Bickell v Brown NO and Other (EL 579/2010, ECD 1179/2010)

Bickell v Brown NO and Other (EL 579/2010, ECD 1179/2010) [2012] ZAECELLC 7 (19 April 2012)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court

Case number

EL 579/2010, ECD 1179/2010

Judge

G Goosen

The court found that the respondents were fully aware of the terms of the court order, which required demolition of the existing venue and construction of a new soundproofed venue, with certification from the Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs before any events could be hosted. The respondents hosted events in breach of the order, relying on advice and letters that did not constitute formal certification as required. The court held that the respondents' belief that they could proceed was grossly unreasonable and not bona fide, as the language of both the rezoning app…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Environmental Authorisation
• Noise Nuisance
• Interdict
• Attorney Client Costs