Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Land And Property [2014] ZACC 37

Arun Property Development (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town (CCT78/14)

Arun Property Development (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town (CCT78/14) [2014] ZACC 37; 2015 (3) BCLR 243 (CC); 2015 (2) SA 584 (CC) (15 December 2014)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 78/14
Judges
Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Leeuw AJ, Madlanga J, Nkabinde J, Van der Westhuizen J, Zondo J

Section 28 of LUPO vests ownership of all public streets and public places in the local authority upon confirmation of a subdivision, but only land required for the normal needs of the development vests without compensation. Excess land, beyond normal needs, vests in the local authority but attracts a statutory right to compensation. The structure plan is not a 'policy' for purposes of section 28 and does not exclude compensation. Vesting of excess land constitutes expropriation, not mere deprivation, and must be compensated in accordance with section 25(2) of the Constitution and the Expropr…

Source excerpt

  • Expropriation
  • Compensation For Excess Land
  • Structure Plan Policy
  • Arbitrary Deprivation
  • Interpretation Of Legislation
  • Exhaustion Of Remedies
Read case analysis
Land And Property [2012] ZAWCHC 399

Arun Property Development (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town (7964/01)

Arun Property Development (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town (7964/01) [2012] ZAWCHC 399 (31 October 2012)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
7964/01
Judge
Dlodlo

The court held that the excess land designated as public streets, which exceeds the normal needs arising from the subdivision, vested in the City of Cape Town in terms of section 28 of LUPO. However, the court found that Arun is entitled to compensation for the excess land, as the vesting was not based on normal need nor in accordance with a policy determined by the Administrator. The compensation must be calculated in terms of the Expropriation Act, 63 of 1975. The court distinguished the present case from Helderberg Park Development (Pty) Ltd, noting that no condition requiring gratis cessi…

Source excerpt

  • Land Use Planning Ordinance
  • Vesting Of Public Streets
  • Compensation For Expropriation
  • Structure Plan Policy
  • Expropriation Act
  • Stare Decisis
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.