Search

Since the commencement of the State Liability Act 20 of 1957 the (until 2011) prevailing legislation rendered it almost impossible to satisfy judgment debts sounding in money against the State. There has been a continuous struggle in South Africa “to reach a balance between State immunity from tort liability and government accountability to the State’s citizens”. The State Liability Amendment Act of 2011 (following on the Constitutional Court’s decision in Nyathi v MEC for Department of Health Gauteng 2008 5 SA 94 (CC)) will enable judgment creditors to obtain effective relief against the State.

The Constitutional Court in Maccsand (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town (CCT 103/11) 2012 ZACC 7 decided that the granting of mining rights or mining permits by the Minister of Mineral Resources in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 does not obviate the obligation on an applicant to obtain authorisations in terms of other legislation that deals with functional domains other than minerals, mining and prospecting. This applies to all other legislation, irrespective of whether the responsible administrator of such other legislation is in the national, provincial or local sphere of government. The effect of the decision is that planning and other authorities which derive their statutory mandate and powers from other legislation retain all their powers as regards planning and rezoning, for instance. In addition, the Minister of Mineral Resources cannot make a decision on behalf of, or for, such functionaries. The judgement also clarified the question of whether or not a national Act can supersede provincial legislation dealing with a distinctly different functional domain. In principle, the decision also indicates that the fact that a range of authorisations are required in terms of separate statutory instruments (each with its own functional domain and administered by its own functionary) does not necessarily amount to conflicts between these instruments. An owner of land may now insist that his land may not be used for mining purposes if it is not zoned for such purposes. It is submitted that, in order to provide certainty to land owners, developers and government functionaries, and to promote investor confidence (especially in the mining sector), an intergovernmental system for the consideration of applications by the functionaries responsible for the separate statutory instruments needs to be developed as a high priority.

In terms of the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act 70 of 1970, the (national) Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has to authorise, in writing, every application for the subdivision of agricultural land. The following proviso was added to the definition of 'agricultural land' in the Act in 1995: "Provided that land situated in the area of jurisdiction of a transitional council as defined in section 1 of the Local Government Transition Act, 1993 (Act No. 209 of 1993), which immediately prior to the first election of the members of such transitional council was classified as agricultural land, shall remain classified as such." The question that arose in this case was whether the proviso only existed during the lifetime of transitional councils. An affirmative answer to the above question would result in the de facto and de jure implicit termination (and disappearance) of agricultural land as a category in South African law and, consequently, of the Minister's power to approve any subdivision of agricultural land. A negative answer would imply that agricultural land remains as a category, that the provisions of SALA need to be complied with, and that the Minister's written approval needs to be obtained for each and every application for subdivision of agricultural land. This article contends that the Constitutional Court was correct in finding that the proviso (and the Act) is still applicable today. Ingevolge die Wet op die Onderverdeling van Landbougrond 70 van 1970 moet die (nasionale) Minister van Landbou, Bosbou en Visserye alle aansoeke vir die onderverdeling van landbougrond skriftelik goedkeur. Die volgende voorbehoudsbepaling is tot die definsie van "landbougrond" in die Wet in 1995 gevoeg: "Met dien verstande dat grond gelee in die regsgebied van 'n oorgangsraad soos omskryf in artikel 1 van die Oorgangswet op Plaaslike Regering, 1993 (Wet 209 van 1993), wat onmiddellik voor die eerste verkiesing van die lede van so 'n oorgangsraad as landbougrond geklassifiseer was, as sodanig geklassifiseer bly". Die vraag wat in hierdie saak beslis moes word, is of die voorbehoudsbepaling slegs tydens die bestaan van die oorgangsrade gegeld het. 'n Bevestigende antwoord sou die de facto en de jure geimpliseerde beeindiging (en verdwyning) van landbougrond as 'n kategorie in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg en, gevolglik, van die Minister se mag om die onderverdeling daarvan goed te keur, tot gevolg he. 'n Negatiewe antwoord sou impliseer dat landbougrond as 'n kategorie bly voortbestaan, dat daar aan die bepalings van die Wet voldoen moet word, en dat die Minister se skriftelike toestemming steeds vereis word vir elke aansoek vir die onderverdeling van landbougrond. Hierdie artikel doen aan die hand dat die Konstitusionele Hof die korrekte beslissing gemaak het deur te bevind dat die voorbehoudsbepaling (en die Wet) steeds vandag van toepassing is.

This article provides an overview of some developments, internationally, regionally and in the SADC, in relation to development, that may be expected to influence the South African government’s response to the development needs of the people in the country. An overview is provided of the somewhat haphazard way in which the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 refers to the need for and objective of development (including rural development) in the country. Through their explanatory outline of three distinct phases in South African rural development law and policy: 1994–2000 (the Reconstruction and Development Programme and related documents and their implementation); 2000–April 2009 (the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Strategy and its implementation) and April 2009+ (the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme and related documents), the authors review some of the historical strengths and future prospects related to rural development in South Africa. Based on an assessment of historical trends, a number of recommendations are made for government’s way forward in the implementation of the constitutional objectives, law and policy relevant to rural development in the country. Keywords : rural development; sustainable development; constitutional law and development; development objectives; rural development policy

Pilots and crewmembers of flights exceeding 7620 m/mean sea level (msl) are required to complete ground training in high-altitude physiology, including hypoxia training. However, regulations do not require altitude chamber training (ACT).An anonymous questionnaire concerning their experiences and perceptions of hypoxia training was filled out by 67 pilots attending an aviation safety conference. All pilots had logged professional business flight hours in the previous 6 mo.There were 62 pilots who reported receiving hypoxia training, and of these, 71% reported having initial ACT. Most of the pilots surveyed agreed that all pilots should receive introductory hypoxia training (92%), recurrent hypoxia training (86%), initial ACT (85%), and recurrent ACT (70%). Initial ACT received lower endorsements for private (32%) or recreational (10%) pilots than for commercial (74%) and air transport (90%) pilots. When asked if ACT should be based on the altitude capability of an aircraft, 59% responded affirmatively. Apparently, the perceived need for ACT was based on the likelihood of flying at higher altitudes and not simply the level of certification. When asked if the current regulations (i.e., not requiring ACT) addressing high-altitude flying (above 7620 m/msl) are sufficient, 52% of the current sample disagreed or strongly disagreed.Generally, these professional pilots perceived that pilot training should include introductory hypoxia training, recurrent hypoxia training, and ACT. Exceptions were initial ACT for recreational pilots and private pilots. Generalizability of these results may be affected by the specificity and size of the sample. Distributing the survey to a wider audience of pilots would provide additional information regarding perceptions of hypoxia training.