The discretion of courts in encroachment disputes
Date
2012
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Juta
Abstract
The main focus of this note is Phillips v South African National Parks Board (4035/07) [2010]
ZAECGHC 27 (22 April 2010) SAFLII <http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAECGHC/2010/27.html>
(accessed 13-06-2012), which was a case dealing with the erection of a fence that encroached on the
applicant’s property. The note explores the current way that courts deal with encroachment disputes
in light of the Phillips judgment. This judgment correctly confirms that courts assume the existence
of a wide discretion to replace injunctive relief (or mandatory interdicts) with compensatory awards; it
illustrates how the discretion will be exercised in order to reach a just and equitable outcome and lays
open the possible constitutional implications that may be triggered if encroachments are not ordered
to be removed.
What is problematic in this case is that the court considered the possibility of ordering transfer of the
land to the affected landowner. If a court exercises its discretion in favour of leaving the encroachment
in place and additionally orders that the encroached-upon land be transferred to the encroacher, this
court order sanctions an involuntary transfer of the affected property. The loss of property or property
rights needs to comply with section 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The
crucial concern in this case is whether the common law actually authorises such a court order that
results in the deprivation. However, the possible constitutional problem that may have been created
by an order for transfer of the affected land was avoided because the court ordered in terms of its
discretion that the encroachment be removed. It should be noted, though, that the court’s remarks
concerning the transfer order were made purely on the basis of the balance of prejudice and not on
any constitutional principle. To my mind, the possibility of constitutional infringement may very well
have arisen if the balance of prejudice favoured the encroacher and therefore the issue needs to be
considered.
Description
Regsgeleerdheid
Privaatreg
Please help us populate SUNScholar with the post print version of this article. It can be e-mailed to: scholar@sun.ac.za
Privaatreg
Please help us populate SUNScholar with the post print version of this article. It can be e-mailed to: scholar@sun.ac.za
Keywords
Encroachment disputes, Adjoining landowners -- Law and legislation, Right of property, Property -- Boundaries
Citation
Stellenbosch Law Review