SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.26 número1Bhuiyan Md JH and Khan BU (eds) Revisiting the Geneva Conventions: 1949-2019 (Brill Nijhoff Leiden 2019) ISBN 978 90 04 37553 6 (cased); 978 90 04 37554 3 (eBook)Is the Dawn of the Robot Lawyer upon us? The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Future of Lawyers índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Em processo de indexaçãoCitado por Google
  • Em processo de indexaçãoSimilares em Google

Compartilhar


Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (PELJ)

versão On-line ISSN 1727-3781

Resumo

NGWENYAMA, LR. The Obligation on Landowners to Accommodate ESTA Occupiers on their Land: Critically Analysing Daniels v Scribante 2017 4 SA 341 (CC). PER [online]. 2023, vol.26, n.1, pp.1-14. ISSN 1727-3781.  http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a13335.

In Daniels v Scribante (hereafter the Daniels case) the Constitutional Court had to decide whether: (a) the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA) afforded Ms Daniels the right to make improvements to her dwelling; (b) if consent from the person in charge, Mr Scribante, was a requirement for Ms Daniels to make such improvements; and (c) if consent was not a requirement, if Ms Daniels could effect improvements to the total disregard of Mr Scribante. The judgment in Daniels is important not only because it paved the way for Ms Daniels to effect improvements on her existing dwelling without the consent of Mr Scribante, but also because it showed that under section 8(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (hereafter the Constitution) on the application of the Bill of Rights Mr Scribante owed a positive obligation to Ms Daniels to ensure that she lived in conditions that afforded her human dignity. In Daniels the Constitutional Court indicated that private landowners were enjoined by section 25(6) of the Constitution through ESTA to accommodate ESTA occupiers on their land. According to the Constitutional Court in Daniels, the nature of the obligation imposed by section 25(6) of the Constitution was both negative and positive, and in this particular case it rested on Mr Scribante. Against this background, this case note provides at the outset the salient facts and judgment of the Daniels case. This is followed by an analysis aimed at critiquing the judgment in Daniels pertaining to what is expected of private landowners in the new constitutional dispensation. It is concluded that more may be required from the private landowner - a positive duty - to ensure that ESTA occupiers enjoy fundamental rights.

Palavras-chave : ESTA occupiers; property rights of private landowners; horizontal application of rights; balancing of rights.

        · texto em Inglês     · Inglês ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons