Department of Private Law

Permanent URI for this community

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/130

Browse

Browsing Department of Private Law by Subject "Access roads -- South Africa"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The availability of the mandament van spolie when upon the subdivision of a farm into two portions and the alienation of these portions to different owners, an existing exit road is replaced : Van Rhyn NNO v Fleurbaix Farm (Pty) Ltd 2013 5 SA 521 (WCC)
    (Juta Law, 2014-01) Van der Merwe, C. G.
    This case concerns the availability of the mandament van spolie in a particular scenario. The context is the subdivision of a plot of land. After the subdivision the owner of one of the subdivided portions closed off a gravel road that provided access to a public road to the owners of both subdivided portions. In an application for a spoliatory order the court a quo directed the appellants to restore the respondent's right of access by way of the gravel road across their property to the road connecting the two properties to the public road. This case came on appeal to the full bench of the Western Cape division of the high court.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Way of necessity : should blokland ever be left sterile
    (Juta Law, 2008-01) Van der Merwe, C. G.
    Jackson NO v Aventura Ltd decided in the Cape high court and its sequel in the supreme court of appeal, Aventura Ltd v Jackson NO, raise interesting questions about undeveloped mountainous agricultural properties being converted to holiday resorts or private family vacation areas without providing a sufficient exit to a public road. In the present case the dominant land concerned was landlocked or "blokland" - ie enclosed on all sides by neighbouring land without an exit to a public road. According to case law on via necessitatis this is a classic example where the owner of the dominant land would be entitled to a way of necessity to a public road in order to exploit the dominant land to its full potential. This case is, however, complicated by the fact that the property concerned as well as all the surrounding properties have been declared sensitive coastal areas in terms of regulations (reg 1526 of 27 Nov 1998) promulgated under the Environment Conservation Act 73 of 1989, which prohibit the disturbance of vegetation and earthworks in these areas and the construction of a road without the consent of the environmental authorities concerned. Consequently the court was faced with the dilemma of whether to decide the issue on common law principles alone or whether it was competent to take environmental issues into account in its decision to grant or not to grant a way of necessity.