CaseNotes LogoCaseNotes
  • Home
  • Library
  • Research
  • Discussion Hub
  • Wiki
  • Latin Dictionary
  • Question Bank
  • Settings
S

Student

Student Account

South African Law • Jurisdictional Corpus
HomeLibraryResearchQuestionsSettings
Judicial Precedent
Ask AI

Britannia Beach Estate (Pty) Ltd and Others v Saldanha Bay Municipality

CitationCCT 11/13
JurisdictionZA
Area of Law
Constitutional LawProcedural Law
Free account

Get the most out of this judgment

Create a free CaseNotes account to save this case, see how it's cited, get an AI summary, and search 10,000+ SA judgments.

Create free accountor sign in

Facts of the Case

This is a procedural directions order issued by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court. The document does not contain the substantive facts of the underlying dispute between Britannia Beach Estate (Pty) Ltd and three other property development companies (as applicants) and Saldanha Bay Municipality (as respondent). The matter involved an application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court from the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Legal Issues

  • The substantive legal issues are not disclosed in this procedural directions order

Judicial Outcome

The Court issued the following procedural directions: (1) The application for leave to appeal was set down for hearing on 28 May 2013 at 10h00; (2) The properly paginated and indexed record was to be prepared by the applicants and lodged by 22 March 2013; (3) The record was to consist only of portions strictly necessary for determining the issues; (4) Applicants were to lodge supplementary volumes ten days before the hearing; (5) Written argument (including on the merits) was to be lodged by the applicants by 28 March 2013 and by the respondent by 5 April 2013; (6) Further directions could be issued.

Ratio Decidendi

Not applicable. This is a procedural directions order and does not contain any binding legal principles or ratio decidendi. No substantive legal issues were determined.

Obiter Dicta

Not applicable. This procedural directions order contains no obiter dicta, observations, or judicial commentary on legal principles. It is purely administrative in nature, setting out procedural requirements for the preparation and hearing of the application for leave to appeal.

Legal Significance

This document has no jurisprudential significance as it is merely a procedural directions order setting out case management timelines and requirements for an application for leave to appeal. It does not determine any substantive legal issues or establish any binding precedent.

Explore More Cases

More Constitutional Law cases

  • (1) Petros Makaza (2) Golden Nhika v The State and (1) Khumbuzo Gumbo (2) Sydney Ndachengedzwa v The StateCCZ 16/17 (Const. Application No. CCZ 5/13 and Const. Application No. CCZ 102/13)
  • (1) Tungamirai Madzokere (2) Lazarus Maengahama (3) Stanford Maengahama (4) Phineous Nhatarikwa (5) Stanford Mangwiro (6) Yvonne Musarurwa (7) Rebecca Mafukeni v The StateSC 8/12; Civil Application No. 318/11
  • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
  • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
  • Aaron Musiteyi v The StateHMT 2-21, B 09/21
  • Abahlali baseMjondolo Movement SA and Another v Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others

Practice This Case

Sign up to practise IRAC analysis, issue spotting, and argument building on this case.

(CCT 12/09) [2009] ZACC 31
  • AB and Another v Minister of Social Development[2016] ZACC 43
  • AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others[2020] ZACC 12
  • More South Africa cases

    • 3M South Africa (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service(272/09) [2010] ZASCA 20 (23 March 2010)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (04 February 2026)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Nicholas Ngwanammoto Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (4 February 2026)
    • 4-Tune Investments (Pty) Ltd v Kingsgate Body CorporateCSOS 4565/WC/22 (Adjudication Order, 29 November 2023)
    • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
    • 9 on Rydal Vale Court Body Corporate v Pan African Holdings Pty LtdCSOS-4563/KZN/23 (Adjudication Order, 8 November 2023)
    • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
    • A A Alloy Foundry (Pty) Limited v Titaco Projects (Pty) LimitedCase No. 309/97