Revisiting the Principles set out in Daniels: A Discussion of Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala

Lerato Rudolph Ngwenyama

doi:10.25159/2522-6800/18195

Authors

Lerato Rudolph Ngwenyama University of South Africa https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1256-3903

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-6800/18195

Keywords:

consent, construction without consent, ESTA, improvements, land infringements, meaningful engagement

Abstract

This case note discusses the judgment in Basfour 3327 (PTY) Ltd v Thwala (LCC160/2017) [2022] ZALCC 20. It revisits principles set out in Daniels v Scribante 2017 (4) SA 341 (CC) to show that, although consent is not a requirement for an occupier to improve an existing dwelling to align it with dignity, meaningful engagement with the owner is necessary. Despite the occupation needs occupiers might have, Daniels is context sensitive and therefore not a blanket authority to construct a new dwelling. This note affirms that Thwala can be distinguished from Daniels: in Thwala, the occupiers were not involved in improving their existing dwelling to make it habitable. Instead, they were constructing a new dwelling outside the demarcated area, without the owner’s consent. Where a dwelling is not habitable and it is necessary to construct a new one, it must be done after meaningful engagement between the occupiers and the owner in accordance with the general guidelines set out in Daniels. The Thwala judgment should be welcomed for speaking out against the violation of the rights and/or interests of owners by occupiers.

References

Carey Miller D and Pope A, Land Title in South Africa (Juta 2000).

De Vos P and W Freedman (eds), South African Constitutional Law in Context (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2021).

Liebenberg S, ‘Engaging the Paradoxes of the Universal and Particular in Human Rights Adjudication: The Possibilities and Pitfalls of “Meaningful Engagement”’ (2012) 12(1) African Human Rights Law Journal.

Mahomedy S, ‘The Potential of Meaningful Engagement in Realising Socio-Economic Rights: Addressing Quality Concerns’ (LLM thesis, Stellenbosch University 2019).

Muller G, ‘Conceptualising “Meaningful Engagement” as a Deliberative Democratic Partnership’ (2011) 22(3) Stellenbosch Law Review.

Muller G, Brits R, Boggenpoel ZT and Pienaar JM, Silberberg and Schoeman’s The Law of Property (6th edn, LexisNexis 2019).

Ngwenyama LR, ‘A Common Standard of Habitability? A Comparison Between Tenants, Usufructuaries and Occupiers in South African Law’ (LLD dissertation, Stellenbosch University 2021).

Pienaar JM, ‘Farm Workers: Extending Security of Tenure in Terms of Recent Legislation’ (1998) 13(2) Southern African Public Law.

Pienaar JM, Land Reform (Juta 2014).

Scheepers T and Du Plessis W, ‘Extension of Security of Tenure Act: A Bone of Contention’ (1998) 61 Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law.

Van der Berg S, ‘Meaningful Engagement: Proceduralising Socio-Economic Rights Further or Infusing Administrative Law with Substance?’ (2013) 29(2) South African Journal on Human Rights. https://doi.org/10.1080/19962126.2013.11865079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19962126.2013.11865079

Cases

Bato Star Fishing (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism 2004 (4) SA 490 (CC).

Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala (LCC160/2017) [2022] ZALCC 20.

Basfour 3327 (Pty) Ltd v Thwala (Leave to Appeal) (LCC160/2017B) [2023] ZALCC 28.

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality v Link Africa (Pty) Ltd 2015 (6) SA 440 (CC).

Daniels v Scribante 2017 (4) SA 341 (CC). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351179270-11

De Jager v Mazibuko (LCC57/2020) [2020] ZALCC 7.

Erasmus v Mtenje (LCC202/2017) [2018] ZALCC 12.

Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC).

Hattingh v Juta 2013 (3) SA 275 (CC).

Klaase v Van der Merwe NO 2016 (6) SA 131 (CC).

Nkosi v Buhrmann (1/2000) [2001] ZASCA 98.

Occupiers of 51 Olivia Road Berea Township & 197 Main Street Johannesburg v City of Johannesburg 2008 (3) SA 208 (CC).

Prinsloo NO v Ngcongwane (LCC 39/2009B) [2023] ZALCC 22.

Rademeyer v Western Districts Council 1998 (3) SA 1011 (SECLD).

Residents of Joe Slovo Community, Western Cape v Thubelisha Homes 2010 (3) SA 454 (CC).

Sibanyoni v Holtzhausen (LCC143/2015) [2019] ZALCC 11.

Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association v Price Waterhouse 2001 (4) SA 551 (SCA).

T.M Sibanyoni & Sibanyoni Family v Van Der Merwe & Any other person in charge of Farm 177, Vaalbank Portion 13 Hendrina, Mpumalanga (LCC 119/2020) [2021] ZALCC 33.

Legislation

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.

Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA).