South Africa Case Law

Hassody Katha v Primathie Pillay N.O. and Others (276/2024)

Hassody Katha v Primathie Pillay N.O. and Others (276/2024) [2025] ZASCA 106 (18 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

276/2024

Judges

Matojane, Koen, Dlodlo, Dawood, Steyn

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the phrase 'superior force' in section 3(1)(a) of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969 must be interpreted contextually and purposively, in line with constitutional principles protecting property rights. Death is an unforeseeable and uncontrollable event that objectively prevents the registered owner from acting to interrupt prescription. Therefore, death constitutes a 'superior force' under the Act, suspending the running of acquisitive prescription. The legislative purpose is to prevent arbitrary deprivation of property rights and to ensure an equitable bala…

Source excerpt

• Acquisitive Prescription
• Prescription Act 68 Of 1969
• Superior Force
• Statutory Interpretation
• Property Rights
• Force Majeure

Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala and Others (1008/2023)

Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala and Others (1008/2023) [2025] ZASCA 105 (18 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1008/2023

Judges

Makgoka, Kgoele, Unterhalter

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondents unlawfully erected a new brick foundation and structure on the appellant's farm without prior engagement or consent, contrary to the requirements of meaningful engagement under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act and the principles established in Daniels v Scribante. The court found that the Land Claims Court erred by treating the application as solely dependent on contempt of court and by failing to consider the declaratory, prohibitory, and demolition relief as independent issues. The respondents' lack of engagement with the appellan…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Meaningful Engagement
• Unlawful Erection Of Structures
• Property Rights
• Demolition Orders

Mountainlands Estate Owners Association and Others v Mpumalanga Tourism And Parks Agency and Others (1957/2024)

Mountainlands Estate Owners Association and Others v Mpumalanga Tourism And Parks Agency and Others (1957/2024) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 59 (26 June 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

1957/2024

Judge

Montsho-Moloisane

The court found that the applicants are the registered owners of nine of the thirteen Geosites and that statutory provisions require engagement with landowners prior to any construction activities. The MTPA acted contrary to the National Heritage Resources Act and the Memorandum of Agreement, prompting SAHRA to issue a cessation order halting all works. The court held that the cessation order rendered the application moot, as there was no longer a live dispute or ongoing injury requiring judicial intervention. Even if the application were not moot, the applicants failed to satisfy the require…

Source excerpt

• Heritage Site Management
• Final Interdict
• Statutory Compliance
• Property Rights
• Road Reserve Construction
• Mootness

Unlawful Occupiers [...] A[...] Street and Others v Rohlandt Holding CC and Others (7583/2019)

Unlawful Occupiers [...] A[...] Street and Others v Rohlandt Holding CC and Others (7583/2019) [2025] ZAGPJHC 512 (27 May 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

7583/2019

Judge

Mahomed

The court found that the applicants failed to clarify the original order at the time it was granted and have delayed resolution by not providing the record. However, given the number of vulnerable persons affected and the ongoing dispute regarding alternate accommodation, immediate execution would result in injustice. The underlying causa remains in dispute, and the court exercised its discretion under Rule 45A to stay execution for four months. The applicants must deliver the record within two months, and the parties are to seek further directions for finalisation. The court refused to revis…

Source excerpt

• Eviction
• Stay Of Execution
• Right To Alternate Accommodation
• Rule 45a
• Property Rights
• Res Judicata

Adoway (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (031793/2023)

Adoway (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (031793/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 339 (27 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

031793/2023

Judge

N P Mali

The court found that the City’s refusal to approve the full title building plans was rational, reasonable, and lawful. The approval of site development plans and sectional title building plans did not confer an automatic right to approval of full title building plans, as each process is governed by distinct legal requirements. The City’s decision was based on the presence of windows on boundary lines, which could disfigure or derogate the value of neighbouring properties and pose safety and privacy risks. The applicants failed to demonstrate that the City’s decision was irrational or contrary…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Building Regulations
• Municipal Decision Review
• Property Rights
• Site Development Plans

Platinum Mile Inv 442 (Pty) Ltd and Another v Chief Director, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment and Others (17469/2024)

Platinum Mile Inv 442 (Pty) Ltd and Another v Chief Director, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment and Others (17469/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 129 (20 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

17469/2024

Judge

CN NZIWENI

The High Court granted an interim interdict stopping Eskom and the National Transmission Company from advancing expropriation steps pending a review.

• Environmental Authorisation
• Public Participation Process
• Interim Interdict
• Expropriation
• Property Rights
• Electricity Infrastructure

Rosevean Investments 0028 (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others (19001/2020)

Rosevean Investments 0028 (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others (19001/2020) [2024] ZAWCHC 409; [2025] 1 All SA 516 (WCC); 2025 (3) SA 616 (WCC) (3 December 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

19001/2020

Judge

P Farlam

The court held that the City’s installation of the sewerage pipeline over the applicant’s property was unlawful because it failed to notify and consult the applicant prior to accessing and constructing the works, as required by the servitude, common law, and principles of administrative justice. The servitude did not grant the City unfettered rights to enter and construct without reasonable notice or consultation. The City’s reliance on statutory powers and subdivision conditions did not absolve it from the obligation to act civiliter modo and procedurally fairly. The applicant was entitled t…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Servitude
• Procedural Fairness
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Declaratory Relief
• Property Rights
• Installation Of Infrastructure

Mafube Coal Mining Proprietary Limited v Buta and Others (LCC40/2024)

Mafube Coal Mining Proprietary Limited v Buta and Others (LCC40/2024) [2024] ZALCC 23 (18 July 2024)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC40/2024

Judge

Ncube

The Land Claims Court discharged an interdict over a burial dispute but declared the burial unlawful and ordered exhumation and reburial, with no costs order.

• Unlawful Burial
• Interim Interdict
• Exhumation Order
• Contempt Of Court
• Property Rights
• Labour Tenant Occupation

Robert Ross Demolishers (Pty) Ltd v All Persons Listed on "RJR1" Portion 20 of Farm 7787 Cape Division and Others (16136/2012)

Robert Ross Demolishers (Pty) Ltd v All Persons Listed on "RJR1" Portion 20 of Farm 7787 Cape Division and Others (16136/2012) [2023] ZAWCHC 226; [2023] 4 All SA 521 (WCC) (28 August 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16136/2012

Judge

Mantame

High Court application to amend an eviction notice of motion partly failed: condonation was refused and amendment against the Minister of Police was dismissed with costs.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Prescription Act
• Eviction Proceedings
• Constitutional Damages
• Joinder Of Parties
• Property Rights

Lord's view Property Owners Association NPC v Member of the Executive Council for the Economic Development, Agriculture, Environment and Rural Development Gauteng Province and Others (43464/2020)

Lord's view Property Owners Association NPC v Member of the Executive Council for the Economic Development, Agriculture, Environment and Rural Development Gauteng Province and Others (43464/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 956 (29 November 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

43464/2020

Judge

N Manoim

The court held that the construction and operation of Cell 7 at the Chloorkop Landfill Site were lawfully authorised under the variation provisions of the 1997 licence, which remains valid by virtue of transitional arrangements in the National Environmental Management: Waste Act. The new environmental legislation does not expressly require a new licence or amendment for such developments where the licence variation procedure is followed. The process met the required pollution control standards, and the lack of public participation did not render the approval unlawful, especially as the appeal…

Source excerpt

• Waste Management Licensing
• Public Participation
• Legitimate Expectation
• Environmental Impact Assessment
• Transitional Provisions
• Property Rights