44387 01-04 Legalb
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
IN the HIGH COURT of SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 231/ 2017 Dates Heard: 25 & 26 April 2018 D
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH CASE NO: 231/ 2017 Dates heard: 25 & 26 April 2018 Date delivered: 3 July 2018 In the matter between N S (born A) Plaintiff And A S Defendant JUDGMENT GOOSEN, J. [1] This is an action for divorce in which the principal issue to be determined concerns the cash component of maintenance payable by the defendant. Prior to the commencement of the trial the parties reached agreement in relation to the primary care of the minor children born of the marriage. The parties also reached agreement in relation to the appointment of a receiver to effect the division of the joint estate. [2] The parties were married to each other in community of property on 25 March 2012. There are two children born of the marriage, both girls, aged 4 years and 1 year, respectively. The children are in the primary care of the plaintiff. Maintenance of the minor children is presently regulated by an interim order made by this Court, pursuant to Rule 43 on 7 December 2017. In terms of that order, Page 2 the defendant pays maintenance of R5 000.00 per month per child in addition to certain non-cash amounts relating to educational and medical related expenses of the children. [3] In her particulars of claim the plaintiff claims payment of R6 500.00 per month per child. The defendant’s plea contains a tender of payment of the amount of R3 500.00 per month per child. -
LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS 2 No
Vol. 651 Pretoria 20 September 2019 , September No. 42714 ( PART1 OF 2 ) LEGAL NOTICES WETLIKE KENNISGEWINGS 2 No. 42714 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 20 SEPTEMBER 2019 STAATSKOERANT, 20 SEPTEMBER 2019 No. 42714 3 Table of Contents LEGAL NOTICES BUSINESS NOTICES • BESIGHEIDSKENNISGEWINGS Gauteng ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Eastern Cape / Oos-Kaap ................................................................................................................. 14 Free State / Vrystaat ........................................................................................................................ 15 Limpopo ....................................................................................................................................... 15 North West / Noordwes ..................................................................................................................... 15 Western Cape / Wes-Kaap ................................................................................................................ 15 COMPANY NOTICES • MAATSKAPPYKENNISGEWINGS Western Cape / Wes-Kaap ................................................................................................................ 16 LIQUIDATOR’S AND OTHER APPOINTEES’ NOTICES LIKWIDATEURS EN ANDER AANGESTELDES SE KENNISGEWINGS Gauteng ...................................................................................................................................... -
Heidedal Filling Station Situated on Erf 16603
FINAL BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT HEIDEDAL FILLING STATION SITUATED ON ERF 16603 Reference No.: EMB/9(i),10(i)13,14,19(i),27/16/05 June 2016 Bokamoso Landscape Architects & Environmental Consultants CC. P. O. Box 11375 Maroelana, 0161 Tel: (012) 346 3810 Fax: 086 570 5659 Email: [email protected] FINAL BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS APPLICATION FORM ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTERS BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT SECTION A: ACTIVITY INFORMATION 03 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 03 2. FEASIBLE AND REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES 06 3. PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE ACTIVITY 09 4. SITE ACCESS 10 5. LOCALITY MAP 12 6. LAYOUT/ROUTE PLAN 14 7. SENSITIVITY MAP 14 8. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 15 9. FACILITY ILLUSTRATION 16 10. ACTIVITY MOTIVATION 16 11. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION, POLICIES AND/OR GUIDELINES 25 12. WASTE, EFFLUENT, EMISSION AND NOISE MANAGEMENT 33 13. WATER USE 35 14. ENERGY EFFICIENCY 35 SECTION B: SITE/AREA/PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 37 1. GRADIENT OF THE SITE 38 2. LOCATION IN LANDSCAPE 38 3. GROUNDWATER, SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL STABILITY OF THE SITE 38 4. GROUNDCOVER 39 5. SURFACE WATER 39 6. LAND USE CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING AREA 40 7. CULTURAL/HISTORICAL FEATURES 42 8. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTER 42 9. BIODIVERSITY 44 FINAL BASIC ASSESSMENT REPORT SECTION C: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 47 1. ADVERTISEMENT AND NOTICE 47 2. DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE MEASURES 47 3. ISSUES RAISED BY INTERESTED AND AFFECTED PARTIES 48 4. COMMENTS AND RESPONSE REPORT 48 5. AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION 48 6. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS 49 SECTION D: IMPACT ASSESSMENT 50 1. IMPACTS THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE PLANNING AND DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONAL, DECOMMISSIONING AND CLOSURE PHASES AS WELL AS PROPOSED MANAGEMENT OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES 50 2. -
In the High Court of South Africa (Eastern Cape Division, Grahamstown)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) Case No. 3917/17 In the matter between WINGS PARK PORT ELIZABETH (PTY) LTD and MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS Plasket J: [1] Wings Park Port Elizabeth (Pty) Ltd (Wings Park) applied to review a decision to refuse it environmental authorisation for the construction and operation of a private airfield in the Kragga Kamma area of Port Elizabeth. It has cited the MEC for Environmental Affairs and Tourism in the Eastern Cape provincial government (the MEC) as the first respondent, and three persons opposed to its proposed development as the second, third and fourth respondents. Only one of them, Mr Raoul van der Merwe, the second respondent, opposes the application, and he does so together with the MEC. Background [2] Wings Park was incorporated for the purpose of developing and operating a members- only airfield for recreational pilots. To this end, it purchased land in the Kragga Kamma area, to the west of Port Elizabeth. This area is described in the papers as a peri-urban area. It purchased this land, according to Dr Russell Phillips, one of Wings Park's directors (and the deponent to the founding affidavit), after a 'detailed assessment of other available options', all of which were found to be unsuitable for one reason or another. [3] The need for the new facility arose as a result of Wings Park's shareholders, all of whom are recreational pilots, finding that it had become increasingly difficult to pursue their chosen past-time from the existing facilities in Port Elizabeth – the Port Elizabeth International Airport and the Progress Aerodrome. -
Bloemfontein / Mangaung Hospitals Brochure
H1N1 EMERGENCY NUMBERS You can help the Free State to prevent and Police Emergency Services deal with H1N1 influenza by taking everyday 10111 BLOEMFONTEIN / precautions that can help protect you and others against flu. Fire Brigade MANGAUNG + 27 51 406 6666 ?Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue HOSPITALS when you cough or sneeze. ?Throw the tissue in the bin after using it. ?Wash your hands with soap and water, especially after coughing or sneezing. AMBULANCE SERVICES ?Avoid close contact with sick people. ?If you have a flu stay at home. Provincial: The symptoms include fever, cough, sore 10177 or + 27 51 407 600 throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. Diarrhea and vomiting may occur. Er24: 084 124 or +2751 444 3724 Should you experience any of these CONTACT symptoms and have had contact with Mapanya 911: somebody who is already infected, seek 086 1960 960 INFORMATION medical attention at your nearest health facility. Netcare 911: 082 911 H1N1 influenza can be successfully treated. Life Rosepark Response: This message is brought to you by the Free 0800 22 22 22 or State Department of Health. +27 51 505 5200 For more information call the H1N1 Hotline number: 0861 364 232. UNIVERSITAS PELONOMI NATIONAL ACADEMIC REGIONAL DISTRICT HOSPITAL HOSPITAL HOSPITAL Universitas Academic Hospital, Universitas Academic Hospital Pelonomi Regional Hospital National District Hospital 1 Logeman Street, Universitas Dr Belcher Road, Heidedal Roth Avenue, Willows • BLOEMFONTEIN Postal Address: Postal Address: Postal Address: Private Bag X20660 -
SUPERIOR COURTS ACT 10 of 2013 (Gazette No. 36743, Notice
(28 February 2014 – to date) SUPERIOR COURTS ACT 10 OF 2013 (Gazette No. 36743, Notice No. 615 dated 12 August 2013. Commencement date: 23 August 2013 [Proc. No. R36, Gazette No. 36774]- with the exception of sections 29, 37 and 45 and Items No. 11 of Schedule 1 and No. 1.1 of Schedule 2) OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE Directive: 3/2014 RENAMING OF COURTS IN TERMS OF SECTION 6 OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS ACT NO 10 OF 2013 Government Notice 148 in Government Gazette 37390 dated 28 February 2014. Commencement date: 28 February 2014. By virtue of the powers vested in me in terms of section 8 of the Superior Courts Act, 2013 (Act no 10 of 2013) (the Act) I, Mogoeng Mogoeng, the Chief Justice of the Republic of South Africa, hereby issue the following directive: The Act created a single High Court, with various divisions constituted in terms of section 6 of the Act. In this regard all court processes in the High Court shall be headed in accordance with the Act; and all court processes shall be as headed as follows: (a) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN (b) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, BHISHO (c) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, MTHATHA (d) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH (e) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN (f) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Prepared by: Page 2 of 2 (g) "IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA" GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, -
Download Book (5.337Mb)
The development and expansion of urban theory has drawn upon the experiences of a handful of global or world cities in the developed north. Conversely, cities of the south have been interpreted and theorised through the lens of development theory. Seldom, if ever, are these two different conceptual realms seen as mutually constituted theorised within the same discursive realm, aiding a more complete understanding of how cities function and change. A similar observation can be made about how our understanding of cities in the developing south have evolved. Large cities in more influential developing countries are nearly always the empirical base from which our understanding of cities in the south takes place. The collection of essays in this book is set against the backdrop of calls for a more inclusive theorisation and understanding of cities, that transcend the dichotomous urban narrative which characterises current academic and policy engagements with cities. Drawing on the experiences of a secondary city in South Africa - Bloemfontein - this collection of essays argues that the realities of un-remarked upon, ordinary cities both challenge and reinforce a number of debates in urban theory and development theory. Spatialities of urban change Selected themes from Bloemfontein at the beginning of the 21st century Lochner Marais & Gustav Visser (eds) Spatialities of urban change: Selected themes from Bloemfontein at the beginning of the 21st century Published by AFRICAN SUN MeDIA, Stellenbosch 7600 www.africansunmedia.co.za www.sun-e-shop.co.za All rights reserved. Copyright © 2008 Lochner Marais & Gustav Visser (eds) No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any electronic, photographic or mechanical means, including photocopying and recording on record, tape or laser disk, on microfilm, via the Internet, by e-mail, or by any other information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission by the publisher. -
In the High Court of South Africa (Eastern Cape
REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) In the matter between: Case No: 47/2014 THEMBANI WHOLESALERS (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED Appellant And BRIAN MZWANELE SEPTEMBER First Respondent BHELEKAZI PORTIA SEPTEMBER Second Respondent Coram: Chetty, Makaula JJ and Brooks AJ Heard: 17 June 2014 Delivered: 26 June 2014 Summary: Practice – Jurisdiction – Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown – Extent of – Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 – Legislative intent – Court exercising jurisdiction over entire geographical area of Eastern Cape Province ________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ________________________________________________________________ Chetty, J Page 2 of 19 [1] This is an opposed application for summary judgment (the application) which, ordinarily, is heard before a single judge in the unopposed motion court. Quintessentially, the defence raised is one of jurisdiction. According to the particulars of claim, the principal place of business of both parties to the lis is in Ngqamakwe, an area over which the Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha, exercises jurisdiction. This court has however, for reasons which will become apparent in due course, been specially constituted pursuant to the provisions of s 14 (1) (a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 (the Act), to primarily determine whether the Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown, has the requisite jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the application. The resolution of the jurisdictional challenge necessitates an analysis of the relevant legislative framework as a precursor to determining the merits of the application. Jurisdiction [2] The balkanization of South Africa by the apartheid regime was pertinently redressed in the founding provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), which proclaimed that “the Republic of South Africa is one, sovereign, democratic state . -
In the High Court of South Africa Free State Division, Bloemfontein
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Reportable: YES/NO Of Interest to other Judges: YES/NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/NO Case no. 4/2018 In the matter between: THE STATE and DITHABA PETRUS MAFAHLE & 12 OTHERS CORAM: I VAN RHYN, AJ HEARD ON: JUDGMENT BY: I VAN RHYN, AJ DELIVERED: 2 JULY 2019 & 5 July 2019 INTRODUCTION: 2 [1] The fifteen (15) Accused before Court have been indicted on seven (7) charges which include three (3) counts of murder read with the relevant provisions of Section 51(1) and Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 (the “CPA”). The Accused are also charged with three (3) counts or robbery with aggravating circumstances and one (1) count of contravening Section 9(1)(a) of the Prevention of Organized Crime Act 121 of 1998 (“POCA”), alternatively contravention of Section 9(2)(a) of POCA also known as “gang-related offences”. [2] Counts 1 to 6 of the indictment relate to the attack, murder and robbery of three (3) minor males, the 19-year old Lefa Soaisa, the 16-year old Vuyani Jacobs Makhapela and Mojalefa Nathan Franse who was 17-years old at the time of his death. [3] The allegations as elaborated upon in the summary provided by the State, against the Accused are that upon or about 30-31 January 2017 and at or near Limo Mall, Bloemside, in the district of Bloemfontein, the Accused who are members of the Born to Kill gang, (the “BTK’s”) met with the three (3) deceased. -
In the High Court of South Africa Eastern Cape Division
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION – GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CC 93/2011 In the matter between: STATE and MICHAEL HUTE Accused ____________________________________________________ SENTENCE ____________________________________________________ MAGEZA AJ: 1 [I] In this matter the accused has been found guilty by this court on one count of rape of his minor daughter who was 7 years of age at the time. At the outset, it is appropriate that this court expresses its appreciation for the commendable efforts of a non-governmental agency named the National Association of Child and Youth Care Workers Association situate within the Alexandria area. This Youth Care Workers Association employs one Ms Nomzikazi Cynthia Geleba, whose commendable selflessness led to the discovery of the victim’s predicament. [2] This court in convicting Mr Hute of the rape, commented that Ms Geleba’s work involves going door to door within the community assessing each family’s state of means or levels of poverty. Her work includes assessing possible instances of the abuse of children and women in the local households. She knew the family of the victim and they lived in a two roomed shack in Jikololo Street, Kwa-Nonkqubela Township in Alexandria. She was also familiar with the victim’s parents including the unemployed mother, one Kaytie Du Plessis, herself (as was Mr Hute), unfortunately an honeybrew beer– ‘Iqhilika’ addict. [3] The dire existential reality of this family has already been canvassed in the principal findings of this court. She said there are a significant number of poor households in the area where this young bright victim and her parents live and that her parents are addicted to ‘Iqhilika’, (honey- brewed beer) which they drink and acquire from different places within the community all the time. -
Representative Standing in South African Law
1 REPRESENTATIVE STANDING IN SOUTH AFRICAN LAW Clive Plasket BA, LLB, LLM (Natal), PhD (Rhodes), Judge of the High Court (Eastern Cape Division), Republic of South Africa Honorary Visiting Professor, Rhodes University, Grahamstown [A] CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA: FROM COLONIAL OUTPOST TO NON-RACIAL DEMOCRACY From the second British occupation of the Cape of Good Hope in 18061 until recently, British constitutional institutions have dominated South African political life.2 At the heart of the various South African constitutions since Union in 1910 – the South Africa Act of 1909 (the union Constitution), the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act 32 of 1961 (the republican Constitution) and the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act 110 of 1983 (the tricameral Constitution) – lay the doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament. It is now widely accepted that this doctrine, because it was separated from its principal political counter-balance, universal franchise, was particularly inappropriate. It allowed for gross abuses of human rights by those in power.3 One of the dominant features of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty was that it envisaged, in the words of the late Mr Justice Ismail Mahomed, a 'legally emasculated judiciary with no judicial teeth to bite into or destroy enactments emanating from Parliament which invade without justification, the deepest wisdom of the common law, or which transgress rights so fundamental for each individual in our 1 See generally, Davenport and Saunders South Africa: A Modern History (5 ed) London, MacMillan Press Ltd: 2000, 42. 2 See Dugard Human Rights and the South African Legal Order Princeton, Princeton University Press: 1978, 8-9 and 14-28. -
South Africa
Opting to Settle in a Small African Town A Case Study of Refugees in Towns Makhanda (formerly Grahamstown), South Africa Barnabas Ticha Muvhuti February, 2019 Contents Location ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction and Methods........................................................................................................................ 4 The Urban Impact...................................................................................................................................... 6 Mapping Makhanda’s Immigrant Population ......................................................................................... 8 Refugees’ Experiences ............................................................................................................................ 9 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................... 14 References ............................................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix A: Background on Refugees in South Africa .................................................................... 17 Appendix B: Background on Migration in Makhanda ........................................................................ 19 About the RIT Project ............................................................................................................................