Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Lemoenshoek Plase (EDMS) BPK v Department van Waterwese and Others (17282/2014) [2015] ZAWCHC 123 (21 May 2015)
The court set aside departmental water directives, holding they lacked a lawful basis, and granted interim relief permitting limited restoration of a water-diversion structure.
Hodgson N.O and Howie N.O and Others (8632/2011) [2014] ZAKZDHC 7 (25 March 2014)
The court referred a property-sale dispute to oral evidence on the validity of the sale, a claimed right-of-way servitude, rectification, and transferability.
3 Tenners Properties CC v Trustees for the time being of the Atlantic Seaboard Trust (9478/2008) [2011] ZAWCHC 51 (22 March 2011)
The court held that the oral agreement as pleaded does not constitute a donation, as the plaintiff agreed not to object to the defendant's building plans, negating the element of pure benevolence required for donation. The agreement also does not constitute an exchange under the Alienation of Land Act, as neither party undertook to transfer a thing to the other; rather, each party agreed to abandon a personal right. The right to object to building plans is not an interest in land, and the defendant provided no authority to the contrary. The court found that the amended declaration is not exci…
Source excerpt
Suid-Afrikaanse Yster En Staal Industriele Korporasie Beperk v Van der Merwe (412/83) [1984] ZASCA 70; [1984] 2 All SA 403 (A) ; 1984 (3) SA 706 (A) (29 May 1984)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's termination of the temporary contract for access did not constitute a self-created necessity that would bar its claim for a right of way. The contract was intended as a temporary measure, and there was no evidence that the appellant waived its right to seek a necessity servitude or that the contract was intended to be permanent. The court found that the appellant was entitled to a right of way over the respondent's property, subject to reasonable compensation and certain conditions to mitigate the impact on the respondent's land. The respo…
Source excerpt
Explore more
