Administrator, Transvaal, and Another v J van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Pty) Ltd

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Botha JA, Smalberger JA, M T Steyn JA, Eksteen JA, Smuts AJA
• Judgment Date: 28 August 1990
• Citation: 1990 (4) SA 644 (A)
• Hearing Date: 22 May 1990
• Court: Appellate Division

Smalberger JA:

E This is an appeal from a judgment of Kriegler J in the Transvaal Provincial Division, leave to appeal having been granted by the Judge a quo. The appeal concerns the validity of Administrator's Notice 1909 of 4 September 1985 ('Notice 1909') issued in terms of the provisions of s 7(1) of the (Transvaal) Roads Ordinance 27 of 1957 ('the F Ordinance'). That section provides:

'The Administrator may by notice in the Provincial Gazette acquire any land and cause it to be registered in the name of the State for the construction or maintenance of any road or for any purpose in connection with the construction or maintenance of any road.'

For a proper appreciation of the issues involved in the appeal it is G necessary to set out in some detail the circumstances which gave rise to the proceedings in the Court a quo. In doing so I shall borrow liberally from the judgment of Kriegler J. What follows is either common cause or not in dispute for the purposes of the present appeal.

In terms of s 20(a) of the ordinance the power in respect of the construction, maintenance and control of any public road in the H Transvaal vests (subject to any contrary provision in the ordinance or in the Road Traffic Ordinance 21 of 1966) in the first appellant ('the Administrator'). By definition (see s 1(v) of the ordinance) construction of a road includes the planning thereof. As far back as 1973 the Administrator caused investigations to be made with a view to alleviating problems caused by traffic congestion on roads P91-1 and 51. I At the time these two roads intersected on the north-western fringes of the municipal area of Kempton Park. Road P91-1 ran approximately from west to east, connecting the eastern suburbs of Johannesburg (in the west) with Kaalfontein (in the east). Road 51 ran approximately from south to north. It connected Isando and Kempton Park (in the south) with J the burgeoning black township of

Smalberger JA

A Tembisa, and Midrand (in the north). On the south-western corner of the intersection of the two roads stands a piece of land known as portion 213 of Zuurfontein 33, IR belonging to the respondent, J van Streepen (Kempton Park) (Pty) Ltd (to which company I shall, for the sake of convenience, continue to refer as 'the respondent').

B The traffic problems caused by the ever increasing number of vehicles using the roads and the unsatisfactory nature of the intersection were compounded by the existence of a private railway line adjoining road 51. This line was operated by the second appellant ('Sentrachem'), and ran over land owned by it through one of its subsidiaries. It ran for several kilometres from near Isando, in the south, to a major industrial C factory complex owned by Sentrachem through one of its subsidiaries (KOP) at Chloorkop, north-west of the aforementioned intersection. Near Isando the railway line crossed road 51 from west to east. From there it ran adjacent and parallel to road 51 to a point close to the Chloorkop factory complex where it crossed over road 51 to the west. Consequently D there were two level crossings over road 51 approximately two kilometres apart. Moreover, immediately to the east of the intersection of the two roads there was a further level crossing where road P91-1 crossed the railway line. The railway line in question was a vital part of Sentrachem's industrial undertaking at Chloorkop, where products of E national and strategic importance are produced. As then situated the railway line did not traverse any portion of the respondent's property.

The consulting engineers appointed to deal with the matter examined and reported upon a number of alternative proposals for the resolution of the traffic problems in the area. The retention of a railway line F connection for Sentrachem between its Chloorkop factory complex and the sources of its raw materials to the south was at all material times a vital consideration essential to the planning of any new roads. Eventually the Administrator, acting through the appropriate provincial authorities, decided to proceed with the planning and implementation of G a combination of two schemes ('the approved scheme'). In broad outline the approved scheme entailed the upgrading of both roads P91-1 and 51 to dual carriageways; the elimination of the level crossings on these roads; the diversion of road P91-1 to the south; and the construction of an interchange approximately a kilometre to the south of the existing intersection. It further entailed the relocation of Sentrachem's railway H line from its position immediately adjacent to the eastern side of road 51 to a position adjacent to the western edge of the upgraded road 51. In its relocated position the railway line was destined to traverse a section of the respondent's property.

Section 5(1)(b) of the ordinance provides that the Administrator may by notice in the Provincial Gazette, after certain prescribed procedures I have been followed, declare that a public road shall exist on any land. By the end of 1983 the planning of the approved scheme had progressed to the point where the Administrator could exercise his powers in terms of that section. This led to the publication, on 28 December 1983, of Administrator's Notice 2161 ('Notice 2161'). In terms of that Notice the J Administrator declared

Smalberger JA

A 'that Public Provincial Road 51 (K117) with varying widths, the general direction and situation of which is shown on the appended sketch plan with appropriate co-ordinates of the boundary beacons, exist(s) within the municipal area of Kempton Park'.

The appended sketch plan depicted the declared road encroaching on portion of the respondent's property along its eastern boundary. The B area so encroached upon was 4 454 square metres in extent. Of the respondent's property thus encroached upon 3 337 square metres had been included in the declared road to accommodate the relocation of Sentrachem's railway line, which was to be located within the road reserve (the road reserve being wide enough for that purpose).

C Work on the approved scheme progressed. Sentrachem's existing railway line was maintained while the new line was being built in order to ensure continuity of rail services. The intention was to link up the Chloorkop factory complex with the new line early in September 1985 and then to continue with the construction of road 51's dual carriageway. In about mid-1985 Sentrachem became concerned about its security of tenure D of the new railway line. On 8 August 1985 NCP Chloorkop (one of the divisions of Sentrachem) wrote a letter to the consulting engineers in the following terms:

'Neem asseblief kennis dat NCP Chloorkop nie van sy bestaande reg op hierdie spoorlyn kan afstand doen voor bevredigende bewys gelewer is dat die verskuifde spoorlyn, wat die gevolg is van die padverklaring, E juridies beveilig is nie.

Die nuwe spoorlyn kan dus nie in gebruik geneem word voordat sodanige skriftelike bewyse gelewer is dat NCP Chloorkop die nuwe roete kan gebruik onderhewig aan dieselfde onvoorwaardelike regte huidig tot sy beskikking nie.

Kan u asseblief so spoedig moontlik hierdie saak met ons uitklaar.'

Due consideration was given to this letter, and on 30 August 1985 the Transvaal Director of Roads submitted a memorandum to the F Administrator-in-Executive-Committee in the following terms:

'1. Weens die verlegging en verbreding van distrikspad 51 wat kragtens Administrateurskennisgewings 175 van 14 Februarie 1979, 648 van 2 Junie 1982, 2161 van 28 Desember 1983 en 1458 van 15 Augustus 1984 afgekondig is, was dit nodig om Klipfonteinse Organiese Produkte (hierna KOP G genoem) se bestaande private spoorlyn te verlê. KOP het eiendomsreg van die betrokke spoorlynreserwe wat oor 'n aantal privaateiendomme gaan. Die spoorlyn is die slagaar van die onderneming deur middel waarvan die grondstowwe vir verwerking na die fabriek vervoer word.

2. KOP beskik nie oor enige onteieningsbevoegdhede nie en as gevolg van die kritieke tydsfaktor in soverre dit die bou van die pad en die H verlegging van die spoorlyn betref, is die Departement genoodsaak om 'n groot gedeelte van die verlegde spoorlyn binne die padreserwe van pad 51 te huisves. Die werk hieraan verbonde is reeds uitgevoer en die oorskakeling na die nuwe spoorlyn is vir 3 September 1985 bepaal en is so beplan dat die bou van die pad sowel as KOP se bedryfsaktiwiteite nie daardeur versteur word nie.

3. Voormelde verlegging en verbreding I van pad 51 neem ook 'n gedeelte van gedeelte 213 van Zuurfontein 33 IR in beslag en affekteer die bestaande toegang na die motorhawe op die perseel soos in oranje op die saamgestelde plan van planne PRS 81/55/7-9 Lyn (in bundelsak) aangetoon. Dit het onder die Departement se aandag gekom (bl 279) dat die eienaar van die betrokke eiendom voornemens is om 'n dringende hofinterdik aan te vra om die verklaring van die pad ongeldig verklaar te kry op grond J daarvan dat die Administrateur se bevoegdheid om spesifiek deur

Smalberger JA

A middel van die verbreding van 'n padreserwe die verlegging van 'n private spoorlyn te akkommodeer, aangeveg word.

4. Daar bestaan 'n wesentlike moontlikheid dat 'n aansoek om 'n hofinterdik van voormelde aard mag slaag. Indien dit gebeur sal ernstige finansiële gevolge vir die Departement ontstaan aangesien die konstruksie van die pad dan grootliks belemmer sal word met B gepaardgaande verlies-eise van die padboukontrakteur wat na raming R250 000 per maand kan beloop. Benewens hierdie eise kan baie groot verlies-eise van die kant van KOP verwag word indien 'n suksesvolle hofinterdik hom die gebruik van die verlegde spoorlyn binne die verklaarde padreserwe sou ontsê. KOP het dus om sy belange te beskerm, 'n brief aan die raadgewende ingenieurs Scott en De Waal gerig waarin daar verklaar word dat hy nie meer bereid is om na...