THE HOUSE IS MINE, SAYS THE DIVORCE ORDER. NOT SO, ARGUES EX-SPOUSE’S CREDITOR: WHEN IS THE SPOUSE’S TITLE UNASSAILABLE?
Fischer v Ubomi Ushishi Trading and Others (1085/2017)  ZASCA 154 (19 November 2018)
An interesting conundrum arose in this matter. X and Y’s marriage in community of property was dissolved pursuant to divorce proceedings. The settlement agreement that was made an order of court provided that Y would acquire X’s half share in the property. Subsequently a creditor of X obtained judgment against X and sought an order allowing execution against X’s half share, as the deeds office records still reflected X and Y as joint owners. Could Y’s objection that she became owner of X’s half share when the divorce order was handed down succeed?
NO FLATS IF ACCESS ROAD LESS THAN 9M WIDE: DO NEARBY LANDOWNERS HAVE STANDING TO ENFORCE SUCH GENERAL PROVISIONS?
Tavakoli and Another v Bantry Hills (Pty) Ltd (1251/2017)  ZASCA 159 (28 November 2018)
Litigation following on building plan approval often involves interpretation of municipal planning laws that bind the general public in the relevant municipality’s jurisdiction, or certain groups within the municipality’s jurisdiction. The distinction can become a crucial issue. This judgment is a case in point and dealt with a provision forming part of City of Cape Town’s general Planning By-Law which precludes the construction of apartment blocks in some instances where access roads are less than 9m wide. Did the claimants, as owners of properties 80m away, have the necessary standing to dispute compliance with the provision?