RA Le Sueur v eThekwini Municipality 2013 JDR 0178 (KZP): An Environmental Law Reading

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Date: 16 August 2019
• Author: AA du Plessis
• Citation: (2014) 25 Stell LR 580
• Pages: 580-594
• Published date: 16 August 2019

580

RA LE SUEUR V ETHEKWINI MUNICIPALITY

2013 JDR 0178 (KZP): AN ENVIRONMENTAL

LAW READING

AA du Plessis

BA LLB LLM LLD

Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, North-West University Potchefstroom Campus

A van der Berg

LLB LLM

LLD Candidate, Faculty of Law, North-West University Potchefstroom Campus

1 Introduction

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (“the Constitution”)

assigned novel status, powers, f unctions and responsibilities to municipalities

in terms of its provisions on local govern ment,1 an extensive Bill of

Rights2 a nd the constitutional pr inciples for co-operative government. 3

Almost t wo decades have passed since t he Constitution was put into effect.

Still, the implementation of govern ment measures and the use of reg ulatory

instru mentation to give effect to the constit utional powers, function s and

responsibilities of municipalities i n the new local government system continue

to reveal legal dif culties. These include complexities related to the nature

and division of constitutional powers a nd functions between the thre e spheres

of government, each with its dif ferent line function s, and within the local

government sphere (bet ween dist rict and local municipalities).

In recent years the judicia ry has been conf ronted with the consequentia l

impact of the new constitut ional design of local government.4 It is, h owever,

not only the constitutional m ake-up of local government that has requ ired of

the cou rts to decide on interesting legal questions. Since 1996 the judiciar y

has dealt with a range of ancilla ry and incidental legal quest ions based inter

alia on the constitut ional environmental r ight5 and the extensive body of

1 Ch 7 of the Constit ution

2 Ch 2

3 S 41

4 See Fedsure Life Assurance Ltd v Greater Johannesburg Transitional Metropolitan Council 1999 1 SA

374 (CC); Governme nt of the Republic of South Af rica v Grootboom 2001 1 SA 46 (CC); Fuel Reta ilers

Associatio n of Southern Af rica v Director -General: Env ironmental Mana gement, Depa rtment of

Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, Mpumalanga Province 2007 6 SA 4 (CC); Beja v Pre mier

of Western Cape 2 011 JDR 0412 (WCC); Mazibuko v C ity of Johannesburg 2010 4 SA 1 (CC); Joseph v

Johannesburg Municipality 2010 4 SA 55 (CC); War y Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Stalwo (Pt y) Ltd 2009 1 SA

337 (CC); Maccsand (Pty) Ltd v C ity of Cape Town 2012 4 SA 181 (CC); and Johannesburg Metropolitan

Municipalit y v Gauteng Development Tribu nal 2010 6 SA 182 (CC) among several other e xamples of

cases wher e the cour ts for diffe rent reasons had to con sider the “new ” constitut ional powers, functions

and r esponsibilitie s of municipalities See also W Freed man “T he Legi slative Auth ority of the Local

Sphere of Gover nment t o Conser ve and Protect the Environme nt: A Critical Analysis of Le Sueur v

Ethekwin i Municipality [2013] ZAK ZPHC 6 (30 January 2013)” (2014) 17 PELJ 567 567-568, 572, 575

5 S 24 of the Constit ution

(2014) 25 Stell LR 580

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd