South Africa Case Law

Matatiele Local Municipality v Zincede Ngokwakho (Pty) Ltd and Others (361/2023P)

Matatiele Local Municipality v Zincede Ngokwakho (Pty) Ltd and Others (361/2023P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 147 (23 November 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

361/2023P

Judge

Sipunzi

The court found that the lease agreement between the applicant and the first respondent expired on 22 May 2022 and was not renewed. The cession of the mining right to the second respondent did not transfer any lease rights, as the lease agreement did not provide for such cession and required written consent for any amendment or variation. The second respondent's mining right did not entitle it to occupy the property without the applicant's consent, and the respondents' conduct in seeking to exercise the lease option confirmed the necessity of the applicant's cooperation. The court held that b…

Source excerpt

• Lease Agreement Expiry
• Mining Rights
• Municipal Asset Transfer
• Cession Of Rights
• Rehabilitation Obligation
• Occupational Rights

Hoffman v Lee (4086/06)

Hoffman v Lee (4086/06) [2008] ZAGPHC 307 (22 August 2008)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

4086/06

Judge

Vorster WR

The High Court found that the plaintiff proved an oral agreement entitling him to R385,000 for improvements to property and granted judgment with interest and costs.

• Oral Agreement
• Occupational Rights
• Improvements To Property
• Enrichment
• Trust Funds
• Oral-agreement

Omar and Another v Minister of Agriculture & Land Affairs and Others (LCC102/07)

Omar and Another v Minister of Agriculture & Land Affairs and Others (LCC102/07) [2007] ZALCC 20 (28 September 2007)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC102/07

Interim agreed order preserving occupation and restraining dealings with Erf 581 pending review of a land restoration award and related settlements.

• Interdict
• Transfer Of Property
• Occupational Rights
• Review Application
• Land-claims
• Property-transfer

Rhode v Stubbs (038/2004)

Rhode v Stubbs (038/2004) [2005] ZASCA 18; 2005 (5) SA 104 (SCA) (29 March 2005)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

038/2004

Judges

Conradie, Mpati, Cameron, Mthiyane, Brand

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the joint will of Attie and Lettie Williams did not result in a merger of their estates. The wording of the will, when read as a whole, did not clearly indicate an intention to merge the estates or to restrict the testamentary freedom of the survivor. The presumption against merger applied, and the relevant clauses were interpreted as each testator disposing only of their own undivided half share in the properties. Consequently, Lettie Williams was entitled to bequeath her undivided half share in the properties as she wished. The respondent, Sarah Dorothy…

Source excerpt

• Joint Wills
• Succession
• Estate Merger
• Interpretation Of Wills
• Undivided Shares
• Occupational Rights