University of Macau / Faculty of Law

This thesis deals with the conceptualization of access to land by the dispossessed as a human right and commences with an account of the struggle for land between the peoples of African and European extractions in South Africa. It is observed that the latter assumed sovereignty over the ancestral lands of the former. The thesis discusses the theoretical foundation of the study and situates the topic within its conceptual parameters. The writer examines the notions of justice and equity in the context of the post apartheid constitutional mandate to redress the skewed policy of the past. It is argued that the dispossession of Africans from lands that they had possessed for thousands of years on the assumption that the land was terra nullius was profoundly iniquitous and unjust. Although the study is technically limited to dispossessions occurring on or after the 13th June 1913, it covers a fairly extensive account of dispossession predating this date. This historical analysis is imperative for two reasons. Besides supporting the writer’s contention that the limitation of restitution to land dispossessed on or after 1913 was arbitrary, it also highlights both the material and non-material cost of the devastating wars of dispossessions. The candidate comments extensively on the post apartheid constitutional property structure which was conceived as a redress to the imbalance created by dispossession. This underlying objective explains why the state’s present land policy is geared towards facilitating access to land for the landless. The thesis investigates the extent to which the present property structure which defines access to land as a human right has succeeded in achieving the stated objective. It reviews the strengths and weaknesses of the land restitution process as well as the question of the payment of just and equitable compensation for land expropriated for restitution. The latter was carefully examined because it plays a crucial role in the success or otherwise of the restitution scheme. The writer argues that the courts have, on occasions, construed just and equitable compensation generously. This approach has failed to reflect the moral component inherent in the Aristotelian corrective justice. This, in the context of South Africa, requires compensation to reflect the fact that what is being paid for is land dispossessed from the forebears of indigenous inhabitants. It seems obvious that the scales of justice are tilted heavily in favour of the propertied class whose ancestors were responsible for this dispossession. This has a ripple effect on the pace of the restitution process. It also seems to have the effect of favouring the property class at the expense of the entire restitution process. The candidate also comments on the court’s differing approaches to the interpretation of the constitutional property clause. The candidate contends that the construction of the property clause and related pieces of legislation in a manner that stresses the maintenance of a balance between private property interest and land reform is flawed. This contention is supported by the fact that these values do not have proportional worth in the present property context of South Africa. The narrow definition of “past racially discriminatory law and practices” and labour tenant as used in the relevant post apartheid land reform laws is criticized for the same reason of its uncontextual approach. A comparative appraisal of similar developments relating to property law in other societies like India and Zimbabwe has been done. The writer has treated the post reform land evictions as a form of dispossession. The candidate notes that the country should guard against allowing the disastrous developments in Zimbabwe to influence events in the country and calls for an amendment of the property clause of the constitution in response to the practical difficulties which a decade of the operation of the current constitution has revealed.

The above topic deals with the land use planning, the land-tenure and the deeds registration systems, applicable in former black urban and rural areas of KwaZulu Natal. These areas are divided into three categories, namely: 1. black townships on former black land (former KwaZulu townships); 2. rural or tribal land; and 3. black townships on former white land (Development Aid (DDA) townships). The writer firstly explains how the above categories of land were created in terms of the 1913 and 1936 land laws and how the administration and control of the first two categories was taken over by the former KwaZulu Legislative Assembly in 1986 whilst administration and control of the last category remained with the South African Development Trust. The writer critically analyses different pieces of legislation relating to the land system in the abovementioned categories of land. The writer further critically analyses the new land laws and their effect on the said land system. / Law / LL.M.

Thesis (LLD)--Stellenbosch University, 2012. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Section 25(2) of the 1996 Constitution states that property may only be expropriated for a public purpose or in the public interest and compensation must be paid. This dissertation analyses the public purpose and public interest requirement in light of recent court decisions, especially with regard to third party transfer of expropriated property for economic development purposes. The public purpose requirement is explained in terms of pre-constitutional case law to create a context in which to understand the public purpose and public interest in terms of the 1996 Constitution. This leads to a discussion of whether third party transfers for economic development purposes are generally for a public purpose or in the public interest. The legitimacy of the purpose of both the expropriation and the transfer of property to third parties in order to realise the purpose is considered. Conclusions from a discussion of foreign case law dealing with the same question are used to analyse the South African cases where third party transfers for economic development have been addressed. Based on the overview of foreign case law and the critical analysis of South African cases, the dissertation sets out guidelines that should be taken into account when this question comes up again in future. The dissertation also considers whether an expropriation can be set aside if alternative means, other than expropriating the property, are available that would also promote the purpose for which the property was expropriated. Recent decisions suggest that alternative and less invasive measures are irrelevant when the expropriation is clearly for a public purpose. However, the dissertation argues that less invasive means should be considered in cases where it is not immediately clear that the expropriation is for a valid public purpose or in the public interest, such as in the case of a third party transfer for economic development. The role of the public purpose post-expropriation is considered with reference to purposes that are not realised or are abandoned and subsequently changed. In this regard the dissertation considers whether the state is allowed to change the purpose for which the property was expropriated, and also under which circumstances the previous owner would be entitled to reclaim the expropriated property when the public purpose that justifies the expropriation falls away. It is contended that the purpose can be changed, but that the new purpose must also comply with the constitutional requirements. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Artikel 25(2) van die Grondwet van 1996 vereis dat `n onteining slegs vir `n openbare doel of in die openbare belang mag plaasvind, en dat vergoeding betaalbaar is. In die proefskrif word die openbare doel en openbare belang geanaliseer in die lig van onlangse regspraak wat veral verband hou met die onteining van grond wat oorgedra word aan derde partye vir doeleindes van ekonomiese ontwikkeling. Die openbare doel vereiste word geanaliseer in die lig van respraak voor die aanvang van die grondwetlike bedeling om beide die openbare doel en openbare belang in terme van die Grondwet van 1996 te verstaan. Op grond van hierdie bespreking word die vraag ondersoek of die onteiening van grond vir ekonomiese ontwikkeling en die oordrag daarvan aan derde partye vir `n openbare doel of in die openbare belang is. Gevolgtrekkings uit `n oorsig van buitelandse respraak waarin dieselfde vraag reeds behandel is dien as maatstaf vir die Suid-Afrikaanse regspraak oor die vraag te evalueer. Op grond van die kritiese analise van die buitelandse regspraak word sekere aanbevelings gemaak wat in ag geneem behoort te word indien so `n vraag weer na vore kom. Die vraag of `n onteiening ter syde gestel kan word omdat daar `n alternatiewe, minder ingrypende manier is om die openbare doel te bereik word ook in die proefskrif aangespreek. In onlangse regspraak word aangedui dat die beskikbaarheid van ander, minder ingrypende maniere irrelevant is as die onteiening vir `n openbare doel of in die openbare belang geskied. Daar word hier aangevoer dat die beskikbaarheid van alternatiewe metodes in ag geneem behoort te word in gevalle waar dit onduidelik is of die onteining vir `n openbare doel of in die openbare belang geskied, soos in die geval van oordrag van grond aan derde partye vir ekonomiese ontwikkelingsdoeleindes. Ter aansluiting by die vraag of die onteining van grond vir oordrag aan derdes vir ekonomiese ontwikkeling geldig is, word die funksie van die openbare doel na onteiening ook ondersoek. Die vraag is of die staat geregtig is om die doel waarvoor die eiendom onteien is na afloop van die onteiening te verander. Die vraag in watter gevalle die vorige eienaar van die grond teruggawe van die grond kan eis word ook aangespreek. Daar word aangevoer dat die staat die doel waarvoor die eiendom benut word kan verander, maar dat die nuwe doel ook moet voldoen aan die grondwetlike vereistes. / South African Research Chair in Property Law, sponsored by the Department of Science and Technology, administered by the National Research Foundation and hosted by Stellenbosch University / Cuicci bursary fund / Faculty of Law Stellenbosch University

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

The above topic deals with the land use planning, the land-tenure and the deeds registration systems, applicable in former black urban and rural areas of KwaZulu Natal. These areas are divided into three categories, namely: 1. black townships on former black land (former KwaZulu townships); 2. rural or tribal land; and 3. black townships on former white land (Development Aid (DDA) townships). The writer firstly explains how the above categories of land were created in terms of the 1913 and 1936 land laws and how the administration and control of the first two categories was taken over by the former KwaZulu Legislative Assembly in 1986 whilst administration and control of the last category remained with the South African Development Trust. The writer critically analyses different pieces of legislation relating to the land system in the abovementioned categories of land. The writer further critically analyses the new land laws and their effect on the said land system. / Law / LL.M.

Southern Africa is experiencing land conflicts themselves in very different ways between state and stakeholders, within and between communities, within families, and specially within singular persons. The conflict of interests in the right to land in southern Africa with particular reference to Mozambique becoming a major issue and evidence conflicts at various levels of society and some of them are quite destructive. The present thesis seeks to address some juridical aspects on access, tenure and land use rights. Land problems have clear roots in the dispossession of Africans under colonialism and apartheid, and the powerful legacy this has left both in terms of outright suffering and also in the historical memory. Land issues are probably the most contentious topic in Mozambique since the independence in 1975. In Southern Africa and Mozambique in particular, one of the most profound causes of such struggles has related to the tenure, the ownership and control of land. In fact the right to land is the major issue in many societies and in Mozambique the unlimited interest in land are quite similar, due the fact that majority of people are peasant or agriculturists. Land is therefore a very strategic socio-economic asset, particularly in poor societies like Mozambique where wealth and survival are measured by control of and access to land. However, land is also a state symbol and source of political influence and power. The Law in Mozambique retains the principle that land is the property of the state and cannot be sold or mortgaged, but it attempts to adjust this legacy from the socialist past to the reality of a market economy. Despite existing land law the government still not enable to control the access and right of use of land. The situation is compounded by a weak or non functioning judiciary system. / Os problemas sobre o direito de acesso, posse, propriedade, uso e aproveitamento da Terra, constituem matéria de debate actual a nível internacional, com realce para a região da Africa Austral e Moçambique em especial. É uma matéria que preocupa os governos e a população em geral, por a terra ser um bem de grande utilidade sócio-económica e política. Moçambique possui um regime jurídico sobre terra (lei nº-19/97 de 1 de Outubro, seu Regulamento e Anexo Técnico), no entanto, ela é lacunosa e carece de reforma afim de se adaptar à realidade dos problemas que se levantam no âmbito da posse, uso e aproveitamento e dos conflitos emergentes. Alguns factores do surgimento de conflitos no âmbito do processo da posse, uso e aproveitamento da terra resultam no entanto, da perda de confiança dos particulares em relação aos órgãos do aparelho do Estado que lidam com matérias sobre terras, devido a burocracia e a corrupção praticada por alguns funcionários. A terra em Moçambique é propriedade do Estado, o que implica uma maior responsabilidade por parte do governo, na sua gestão. O actual regime jurídico sobre a terra, carece de concertação de alguns aspectos fundamentais do ponto de vista legal. Trata-se da harmonização da legislação pertinente sobre terras. As leis promulgadas sobre a matéria embora defendem a necessidade de gestão da terra que beneficie os seus utilizadores, tal vontade, entretanto, não têm produzido efeitos satisfatórios. É, pois, neste contexto, que a presente tese cujo título é Alguns Aspectos do Regime Jurídico da posse e do Direito de uso e aproveitamento da terra e os conflitos emergentes em Mçambique, pretende contribuir na contínua abordagem sobre a problemática da posse da terra e dos conflitos emergentes. Bem gerida, a terra pode constituir um importante factor de paz, estabilidade sócio-política e de desenvolvimento económico. / Public Constitutional and International Law / Thesis (LL.D. )

Southern Africa is experiencing land conflicts themselves in very different ways between state and stakeholders, within and between communities, within families, and specially within singular persons. The conflict of interests in the right to land in southern Africa with particular reference to Mozambique becoming a major issue and evidence conflicts at various levels of society and some of them are quite destructive. The present thesis seeks to address some juridical aspects on access, tenure and land use rights. Land problems have clear roots in the dispossession of Africans under colonialism and apartheid, and the powerful legacy this has left both in terms of outright suffering and also in the historical memory. Land issues are probably the most contentious topic in Mozambique since the independence in 1975. In Southern Africa and Mozambique in particular, one of the most profound causes of such struggles has related to the tenure, the ownership and control of land. In fact the right to land is the major issue in many societies and in Mozambique the unlimited interest in land are quite similar, due the fact that majority of people are peasant or agriculturists. Land is therefore a very strategic socio-economic asset, particularly in poor societies like Mozambique where wealth and survival are measured by control of and access to land. However, land is also a state symbol and source of political influence and power. The Law in Mozambique retains the principle that land is the property of the state and cannot be sold or mortgaged, but it attempts to adjust this legacy from the socialist past to the reality of a market economy. Despite existing land law the government still not enable to control the access and right of use of land. The situation is compounded by a weak or non functioning judiciary system. / Os problemas sobre o direito de acesso, posse, propriedade, uso e aproveitamento da Terra, constituem matéria de debate actual a nível internacional, com realce para a região da Africa Austral e Moçambique em especial. É uma matéria que preocupa os governos e a população em geral, por a terra ser um bem de grande utilidade sócio-económica e política. Moçambique possui um regime jurídico sobre terra (lei nº-19/97 de 1 de Outubro, seu Regulamento e Anexo Técnico), no entanto, ela é lacunosa e carece de reforma afim de se adaptar à realidade dos problemas que se levantam no âmbito da posse, uso e aproveitamento e dos conflitos emergentes. Alguns factores do surgimento de conflitos no âmbito do processo da posse, uso e aproveitamento da terra resultam no entanto, da perda de confiança dos particulares em relação aos órgãos do aparelho do Estado que lidam com matérias sobre terras, devido a burocracia e a corrupção praticada por alguns funcionários. A terra em Moçambique é propriedade do Estado, o que implica uma maior responsabilidade por parte do governo, na sua gestão. O actual regime jurídico sobre a terra, carece de concertação de alguns aspectos fundamentais do ponto de vista legal. Trata-se da harmonização da legislação pertinente sobre terras. As leis promulgadas sobre a matéria embora defendem a necessidade de gestão da terra que beneficie os seus utilizadores, tal vontade, entretanto, não têm produzido efeitos satisfatórios. É, pois, neste contexto, que a presente tese cujo título é Alguns Aspectos do Regime Jurídico da posse e do Direito de uso e aproveitamento da terra e os conflitos emergentes em Mçambique, pretende contribuir na contínua abordagem sobre a problemática da posse da terra e dos conflitos emergentes. Bem gerida, a terra pode constituir um importante factor de paz, estabilidade sócio-política e de desenvolvimento económico. / Public Constitutional and International Law / Thesis (LL.D. )

Over the past decade, the regulation of mining in South Africa has undergone a fundamental transformation in order to promote equitable access to the nation’s mineral and petroleum resources. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002, drastically changed the regulation of mining by placing the nation’s mineral and petroleum resources under the custodianship of the state. The transformative objectives of resource reform, as envisaged in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, could however not be achieved without a measure of sacrifice -- most notably, that which had to be shouldered by the owners of the land in which the minerals are contained. Under common law, minerals vested in the owners of land and no one could compel them to extract or consent to the extraction of these minerals. Landowners were able to safeguard their land from mining activities by refusing to consent to mining. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002, changed this by providing that landowners could no longer prevent the state from granting qualifying applicants authorisation to mine. The transformative objectives of resource reform, have inevitably made great inroads into a landowner’s rights to use and enjoy his property optimally. The main focus of this study revolves around the limiting impact of South Africa’s current mineral-law dispensation on township development, and conversely, how township development impairs or limits the mining of coal. For a better understanding of the limitations which the current legislative provisions create in respect of the rights of landowners and holders of mining rights, a brief evaluation of the historical development of the right to mine coal is provided. The entitlements and reciprocal obligations of holders of mining rights and owners of the affected land are considered, and the parties’ legal remedies to resist interference in their respective rights are explored. In the process of considering possible remedies to resolve the conflict which inevitably arises, I explain why English-law principles governing lateral support (support owed by two adjacent properties [neighbour law]), and subjacent support (where the landowner may not be deprived of the vertical support his property derives from the sub-surface minerals) were incorrectly transplanted into our law. In Anglo Operations Ltd v Sandhurst Estates (Pty) Ltd, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal rejected the previously-held view that the right to subjacent support -- like the right to lateral support -- is a natural property right incidental to the ownership of the land. It was further held that conflict between holders of rights to minerals and owners of land should be resolved, not in accordance with English-law principles of neighbour law, but in terms of the law developed for rights relating to the use of servitudes. In summary, the court found that where the parties have not specifically contracted against the specific action (such as opencast or planned-subsidence mining), and provided that it was reasonably necessary for the mining right holder to use this invasive method, he may do so, so long as he does so in the manner least injurious to the entitlements of the surface owner. This decision, however, did not take into account the changes brought about by the comprehensive statutory framework of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 which I argue has replaced the earlier servitude construction. In this dissertation I consider whether possible solutions to resolve the conflict can be found in the principles relating to neighbour law, and whether the principles governing the use of servitudes remain relevant in resolving conflicts between landowners and holders of mining rights. I evaluate possible legal remedies and place special emphasis on the constitutionality of the curtailment of a landowner’s use and enjoyment of his property resulting from mining activities on or under his land. I further consider whether the exercise of a mining right, granted by the state, which results in a serious infringement of a landowner’s ownership, could in certain circumstances amount to a deprivation or possibly an expropriation in terms of section 25 of the Constitution. I discuss the position where the state’s regulatory interference is so severe that it deprives a landowner of the ability to exercise any, or a substantial portion of his ownership entitlements. I evaluate the possibility that such interference may constitute de facto expropriation for which compensation may be claimed. In the penultimate chapter I briefly mention how the relationship between landowners and holders of mining rights is managed and conflict is defused in other jurisdictions such as China, Australia, the United States of America, India, Germany and Swaziland. I conclude this dissertation with suggestions on possible ways in which the conflict may be resolved or at least minimised in future. / Die regulering van mynbou in Suid-Afrika het die afgelope dekade ‘n fundamentele verandering ondergaan ten einde breër toegang tot die nasie se minerale en petroleum hulpbronne te bevorder. Die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act,6 Wet 28 van 2002, het ‘n radikale ommekeer in die mynbou industrie meegebring deurdat die regulering van mynbou aktiwiteite onder die toesig en beheer van die nasionale regering geplaas is. Die transformatiewe oogmerk van hulpbron hervorming ingevolge die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika kon egter nie geskied sonder ‘n mate van opoffering nie. Die grootste aanslag van die nuwe mineraalreg bedeling word sonder twyfel gevoel deur die eienaars van grond ten opsigte waarvan mynregte deur die regering aan ‘n ander party toegeken word. Ingevolge die gemenereg was die eienaar van grond voorheen ook die eienaar van die minerale wat in die grond voorgekom het. Gevolglik was dit onder die uitsluitlike beheer van die eienaar om te bepaal of enigiemand anders die reg kon verkry om minerale op of in die betrokke grond te ontgin. Na aanvang van die inwerkingtreding van die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act is hierdie posisie egter omvêrgewerp aangesien die regering voortaan die bevoegdheid het om te bepaal wie en op watter voorwaardes iemand die reg verkry om minerale te ontgin. Die toekenning van die reg om minerale te ontgin op ‘n ander se eiendom sonder die eienaar se toestemming, maak dus ernstige inbreuk op sy regte. Grondeienaars se bevoegdhede wat uit hul eiendomsreg voortvloei word in talle gevalle ernstig ingeperk ten einde die oogmerke van hulpbron transformasie te bereik. Die ondersoek wat hierna volg, is daarop toegespits om die beperkende aanslag van die regulering van steenkoolmynbou-aktiwiteite op die ontwikkeling van dorpsgebiede asook dié van die ontwikkeling van dorpsgebiedie op steenkoolmynbou beter te verstaan. Ten einde hierdie invloed beter te verstaan, word die geskiedkundige ontwikkeling van die reg om minerale in Suid-Afrika te ontgin kortliks oorweeg. Die regte en verpligtinge van die houers van mynregte en die eienaars van die grond wat deur die uitoefening daarvan geraak word, asook die remedies waaroor die onderskye partye beskik ten einde hul regte teen inbreukmaking deur die ander party te beskerm, word daarna oorweeg. In genoemde ondersoek toon ek aan waarom die Engelsregtelike burereg- beginsels van laterale steun en onderstut nie toepassing in ons reg behoort te vind nie en waarom die botsing wat ontstaan vanweë die uitoefening van die grondeienaar en die houer van ‘n mynreg se regte liefs versoen moet word deur die Suid-Afrikaanse serwituutreg beginsels toe te pas soos aangetoon in die beslissing van Anglo Operations Ltd v Sandhurst Estates. Hiedie beslissing het egter nie die veranderinge wat meegebring is deur die nuwe bedeling van die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act in ag geneem nie en daar word gevolglik aangevoer dat die serwituut beginsels vervang is deur ‘n breedvoerige wetgewende stelsel. Die grondwetlikheid van die beperking op die bevoegdhede van ‘n grondeienaar om sy eiendom te gebruik en te geniet, word ondersoek, asook of daar enige gronde vir ‘n eis om skadevergoeding mag wees. In besonder word daar oorweeg of die leerstuk van konstruktiewe onteiening moontlik toepassing kan vind in gevalle waar die staat se regulering ‘n uitermatige beperkende effek het op die bevoegdhede van ‘n grondeienaar om sy eiendomsreg uit te oefen. In die voorlaaste hoofstuk ontleed ek baie kortliks hoe die verhouding tussen eienaars van grond in mynbougebiede en houers van regte om minerale te ontgin in Sjina, Australië, die Verenigde State van Amerika, Indië, Duitsland en Swaziland gereguleer word. Ter afsluiting word aandag gegee aan moontlike maniere om die belangebotsing tussen die betrokke partye uit die weg te ruim of te beperk. / Private Law / LL.M.

Over the past decade, the regulation of mining in South Africa has undergone a fundamental transformation in order to promote equitable access to the nation’s mineral and petroleum resources. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002, drastically changed the regulation of mining by placing the nation’s mineral and petroleum resources under the custodianship of the state. The transformative objectives of resource reform, as envisaged in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, could however not be achieved without a measure of sacrifice -- most notably, that which had to be shouldered by the owners of the land in which the minerals are contained. Under common law, minerals vested in the owners of land and no one could compel them to extract or consent to the extraction of these minerals. Landowners were able to safeguard their land from mining activities by refusing to consent to mining. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002, changed this by providing that landowners could no longer prevent the state from granting qualifying applicants authorisation to mine. The transformative objectives of resource reform, have inevitably made great inroads into a landowner’s rights to use and enjoy his property optimally. The main focus of this study revolves around the limiting impact of South Africa’s current mineral-law dispensation on township development, and conversely, how township development impairs or limits the mining of coal. For a better understanding of the limitations which the current legislative provisions create in respect of the rights of landowners and holders of mining rights, a brief evaluation of the historical development of the right to mine coal is provided. The entitlements and reciprocal obligations of holders of mining rights and owners of the affected land are considered, and the parties’ legal remedies to resist interference in their respective rights are explored. In the process of considering possible remedies to resolve the conflict which inevitably arises, I explain why English-law principles governing lateral support (support owed by two adjacent properties [neighbour law]), and subjacent support (where the landowner may not be deprived of the vertical support his property derives from the sub-surface minerals) were incorrectly transplanted into our law. In Anglo Operations Ltd v Sandhurst Estates (Pty) Ltd, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal rejected the previously-held view that the right to subjacent support -- like the right to lateral support -- is a natural property right incidental to the ownership of the land. It was further held that conflict between holders of rights to minerals and owners of land should be resolved, not in accordance with English-law principles of neighbour law, but in terms of the law developed for rights relating to the use of servitudes. In summary, the court found that where the parties have not specifically contracted against the specific action (such as opencast or planned-subsidence mining), and provided that it was reasonably necessary for the mining right holder to use this invasive method, he may do so, so long as he does so in the manner least injurious to the entitlements of the surface owner. This decision, however, did not take into account the changes brought about by the comprehensive statutory framework of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 which I argue has replaced the earlier servitude construction. In this dissertation I consider whether possible solutions to resolve the conflict can be found in the principles relating to neighbour law, and whether the principles governing the use of servitudes remain relevant in resolving conflicts between landowners and holders of mining rights. I evaluate possible legal remedies and place special emphasis on the constitutionality of the curtailment of a landowner’s use and enjoyment of his property resulting from mining activities on or under his land. I further consider whether the exercise of a mining right, granted by the state, which results in a serious infringement of a landowner’s ownership, could in certain circumstances amount to a deprivation or possibly an expropriation in terms of section 25 of the Constitution. I discuss the position where the state’s regulatory interference is so severe that it deprives a landowner of the ability to exercise any, or a substantial portion of his ownership entitlements. I evaluate the possibility that such interference may constitute de facto expropriation for which compensation may be claimed. In the penultimate chapter I briefly mention how the relationship between landowners and holders of mining rights is managed and conflict is defused in other jurisdictions such as China, Australia, the United States of America, India, Germany and Swaziland. I conclude this dissertation with suggestions on possible ways in which the conflict may be resolved or at least minimised in future. / Die regulering van mynbou in Suid-Afrika het die afgelope dekade ‘n fundamentele verandering ondergaan ten einde breër toegang tot die nasie se minerale en petroleum hulpbronne te bevorder. Die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act,6 Wet 28 van 2002, het ‘n radikale ommekeer in die mynbou industrie meegebring deurdat die regulering van mynbou aktiwiteite onder die toesig en beheer van die nasionale regering geplaas is. Die transformatiewe oogmerk van hulpbron hervorming ingevolge die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika kon egter nie geskied sonder ‘n mate van opoffering nie. Die grootste aanslag van die nuwe mineraalreg bedeling word sonder twyfel gevoel deur die eienaars van grond ten opsigte waarvan mynregte deur die regering aan ‘n ander party toegeken word. Ingevolge die gemenereg was die eienaar van grond voorheen ook die eienaar van die minerale wat in die grond voorgekom het. Gevolglik was dit onder die uitsluitlike beheer van die eienaar om te bepaal of enigiemand anders die reg kon verkry om minerale op of in die betrokke grond te ontgin. Na aanvang van die inwerkingtreding van die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act is hierdie posisie egter omvêrgewerp aangesien die regering voortaan die bevoegdheid het om te bepaal wie en op watter voorwaardes iemand die reg verkry om minerale te ontgin. Die toekenning van die reg om minerale te ontgin op ‘n ander se eiendom sonder die eienaar se toestemming, maak dus ernstige inbreuk op sy regte. Grondeienaars se bevoegdhede wat uit hul eiendomsreg voortvloei word in talle gevalle ernstig ingeperk ten einde die oogmerke van hulpbron transformasie te bereik. Die ondersoek wat hierna volg, is daarop toegespits om die beperkende aanslag van die regulering van steenkoolmynbou-aktiwiteite op die ontwikkeling van dorpsgebiede asook dié van die ontwikkeling van dorpsgebiedie op steenkoolmynbou beter te verstaan. Ten einde hierdie invloed beter te verstaan, word die geskiedkundige ontwikkeling van die reg om minerale in Suid-Afrika te ontgin kortliks oorweeg. Die regte en verpligtinge van die houers van mynregte en die eienaars van die grond wat deur die uitoefening daarvan geraak word, asook die remedies waaroor die onderskye partye beskik ten einde hul regte teen inbreukmaking deur die ander party te beskerm, word daarna oorweeg. In genoemde ondersoek toon ek aan waarom die Engelsregtelike burereg- beginsels van laterale steun en onderstut nie toepassing in ons reg behoort te vind nie en waarom die botsing wat ontstaan vanweë die uitoefening van die grondeienaar en die houer van ‘n mynreg se regte liefs versoen moet word deur die Suid-Afrikaanse serwituutreg beginsels toe te pas soos aangetoon in die beslissing van Anglo Operations Ltd v Sandhurst Estates. Hiedie beslissing het egter nie die veranderinge wat meegebring is deur die nuwe bedeling van die Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act in ag geneem nie en daar word gevolglik aangevoer dat die serwituut beginsels vervang is deur ‘n breedvoerige wetgewende stelsel. Die grondwetlikheid van die beperking op die bevoegdhede van ‘n grondeienaar om sy eiendom te gebruik en te geniet, word ondersoek, asook of daar enige gronde vir ‘n eis om skadevergoeding mag wees. In besonder word daar oorweeg of die leerstuk van konstruktiewe onteiening moontlik toepassing kan vind in gevalle waar die staat se regulering ‘n uitermatige beperkende effek het op die bevoegdhede van ‘n grondeienaar om sy eiendomsreg uit te oefen. In die voorlaaste hoofstuk ontleed ek baie kortliks hoe die verhouding tussen eienaars van grond in mynbougebiede en houers van regte om minerale te ontgin in Sjina, Australië, die Verenigde State van Amerika, Indië, Duitsland en Swaziland gereguleer word. Ter afsluiting word aandag gegee aan moontlike maniere om die belangebotsing tussen die betrokke partye uit die weg te ruim of te beperk. / Private Law / LL. M.