BUILDING OBJECTIONABLE, UNSIGHTLY OR DISFIGURING OF AREA? APPLY LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION TEST
Trustees of the Simcha Trust v Da Cruz and Others; City of Cape Town v Da Cruz and Others (CCT125/18; CCT128/18)  ZACC 8 (19 February 2019)
This Constitutional Court judgment provides clear guidelines as to the proper import and interpretation of section 7(1) of the Building Standards Act which finds application when a local authority is asked to approve building plans. The Court confirmed that the ‘legitimate expectation’ test must be applied by the decision-makers, who must, amongst other things, objectively determine whether the proposed building will probably, or in fact, be so disfiguring of the area, objectionable or unsightly that it would exceed the legitimate expectations of a hypothetical owner of a neighbouring property. The judgment illustrates the practical application hereof.
IS AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN AN (ALLEGED) VOID AGREEMENT ENFORCEABLE?
Seabeach Property Investment No 28 v Nunn (18310/18)  ZAWCHC 9 (22 February 2019)
If you conclude a contract for the sale of a property and include an arbitration clause to deal with disputes, will that clause still stand if the validity of the sale agreement is disputed because of a material misunderstanding relating to the nature of exclusive use areas that were included in the sale? This question was addressed in the judgment under discussion. Ultimately, the answer depends on the intention of the parties when they contracted, as it appears from the wording used in the agreement.