Thesis (LLD )--Stellenbosch University, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Acquisitive prescription (“prescription”), an original method of acquisition of ownership, is regulated by two prescription acts. Prescription is mostly regarded as an unproblematic area of South African property law, since its requirements are reasonably clear and legally certain. However, the unproblematic nature of this legal rule was recently brought into question by the English Pye case. This case concerned an owner in England who lost valuable land through adverse possession. After the domestic courts confirmed that the owner had lost ownership through adverse possession, the Fourth Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg found that this legal institution constituted an uncompensated expropriation, which is in conflict with Article 1 of Protocol No 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. This judgment may have repercussions for the constitutionality of prescription in South African law, despite the fact that the Grand Chamber – on appeal – found that adverse possession actually constitutes a mere (constitutional) deprivation of property. Therefore, it was necessary to investigate whether prescription is in line with section 25 of the Constitution. To answer this question, the dissertation investigates the historical roots of prescription in Roman and Roman-Dutch law, together with its modern requirements in South African law. The focus then shifts to how prescription operates in certain foreign systems, namely England, the Netherlands, France and Germany. This comparative perspective illustrates that the requirements for prescription are stricter in jurisdictions with a positive registration system. Furthermore, the civil law countries require possessors to possess property with the more strenuous animus domini, as opposed to English law that merely requires possession animo possidendi. The justifications for prescription are subsequently analysed in terms of the Lockean labour theory, Radin’s personality theory and law and economics theory. These theories indicate that sufficient moral and economic reasons exist for retaining prescription in countries with a negative registration system. These conclusions are finally used to determine whether prescription is in line with the property clause. The FNB methodology indicates that prescription constitutes a non-arbitrary deprivation of property. If one adheres to the FNB methodology it is equally unlikely that prescription could amount to an uncompensated expropriation or even to constructive expropriation. I conclude that prescription is in line with the South African property clause, which is analogous to the decision of the Grand Chamber in Pye. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Verkrygende verjaring (“verjaring”), ‘n oorspronklike wyse van verkryging van eiendomsreg, word gereguleer deur twee verjaringswette. Verjaring word grotendeels beskou as ‘n onproblematiese aspek van die Suid-Afrikaanse sakereg, aangesien die vereistes daarvan taamlik duidelik en regseker is. Nietemin is die onproblematiese aard van hierdie regsinstelling onlangs deur die Engelse Pye-saak in twyfel getrek. Hierdie saak handel oor ‘n eienaar wat waardevolle grond in Engeland deur adverse possession verloor het. Nadat die plaaslike howe die verlies van eiendomsreg deur adverse possession bevestig het, het die Vierde Kamer van die Europese Hof van Menseregte in Straatsburg bevind dat hierdie regsreël neerkom op ‘n ongekompenseerde onteiening, wat inbreuk maak op Artikel 1 van die Eerste Protokol tot die Europese Verdrag van die Reg van die Mens 1950. Hierdie uitspraak kan implikasies inhou vir die grondwetlikheid van verjaring in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg, ten spyte van die Groot Kamer se bevinding – op appèl – dat adverse possession eintlik neerkom op ‘n grondwetlik geldige ontneming van eiendom. Derhalwe was dit nodig om te bepaal of verjaring bestaanbaar is met artikel 25 van die Suid-Afrikaanse Grondwet. Vir hierdie doel word die geskiedkundige wortels van verjaring in die Romeinse en Romeins- Hollandse reg, tesame met die moderne vereistes daarvan in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg, ondersoek. Daar word ook gekyk na hoe hierdie regsreël in buitelandse regstelsels, naamlik Engeland, Nederland, Frankryk en Duitsland, funksioneer. Hierdie regsvergelykende studie toon dat verjaring strenger vereistes het in regstelsels met ‘n positiewe registrasiestelsel. Verder vereis die sivielregtelike lande dat ‘n besitter die grond animo domini moet besit, wat strenger is as die Engelsregtelike animus possidendi-vereiste. Die regverdigingsgronde van verjaring word vervolgens geëvalueer ingevolge die Lockeaanse arbeidsteorie, Radin se persoonlikheidsteorie en law and economics-teorie. Hierdie teorieë illustreer dat daar genoegsame morele en ekonomiese regverdigings vir die bestaan van verjaring is in lande met ‘n negatiewe regstrasiestelsel. Hierdie bevindings word ten slotte gebruik om te bepaal of verjaring bestaanbaar is met die eiendomsklousule. Die FNB-metodologie toon dat verjaring neerkom op ‘n geldige, nie-arbitrêre ontneming volgens artikel 25(1). Indien ‘n mens die FNB-metodologie volg is dit eweneens onwaarskynlik dat verjaring op ‘n ongekompenseerde onteiening – of selfs op konstruktiewe onteiening – neerkom. Gevolglik strook verjaring wel met die Suid-Afrikaanse eiendomsklousule, welke uitkoms soortgelyk is aan dié van die Groot Kamer in die Pye-saak.

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the development of the notion of property concept since the promulgation of the Constitution of South Africa 108 of 1996 with special reference to the influence of statutory developments and especially the influence of Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In the preamble to the Constitution it is made very clear that the injustices of the past are recognised and that it is endeavoured to rectify the division of the past and that all efforts are to be made to build a future that is characterised for the acknowledgement of human rights, democracy, equality and peaceful co-existence. In the Bill of Rights the right to property is acknowledged as a fundamental right and is it also mentioned that the state must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights. Before the Constitution common law protection for ownership was well established, but no statutory protection for ownership existed. The effect of the property clause (section 25) of the Constitution was that not only ownership, but also other rights to property protected. The property clause prescribes that no one may be deprived of his property, except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property. No fundamental right is absolute with the effect that conflict may arise between the different clauses of the Bill of Rights. A typical example may be where the rights of an owner of immovable come into conflict with another person's right to housing. It must, however, always be borne in mind that no fundamental right is absolute that it is possible, under certain circumstances, to limit a fundamental right. This limitation may also occur in the case of property rights. Certain statutory developments took place since the promulgation of the Constitution. The most important of these developments is of course the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In terms of this Act it is required that certain formalities are to be fulfilled before an unlawful occupier may be evicted from property. The relevant part of the Act is the definition of an illegal occupier. Despite the fact that it was decided in several court cases that an illegal occupier does not include a person who previously had permission to occupy the property, it was decided by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Ndlovu v Ngcobo : Bekker v Jika that the act is applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or a mortgagor who's mortgage has been foreclosed and who now refuses to vacate the property in question. The key findings are that the property concept has developed drastically since the Constitution. In regard to statutory development the most important development was the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which was found to be applicable to all unlawful occupiers of property, regardless of the fact that the occupiers may previously have occupied the property lawfully. The Legal Amendment Bill is to rectify this in order to ensure that the Prevention of lllegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act will no longer be applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or mortgagors who's bond have been called up and who now refuse to vacate the property in question This amendment will bring the (often) conflicting fundamental rights to property and housing into a greater degree of harmony, even though it will not solve all problems. It is the duty of the State to address this and all other potential conflict between different fundamental rights. The method used in this dissertation was the analytical study of statutes, court cases and articles in legal magazines. / Thesis (LL.M. (Estate Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the development of the notion of property concept since the promulgation of the Constitution of South Africa 108 of 1996 with special reference to the influence of statutory developments and especially the influence of Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In the preamble to the Constitution it is made very clear that the injustices of the past are recognised and that it is endeavoured to rectify the division of the past and that all efforts are to be made to build a future that is characterised for the acknowledgement of human rights, democracy, equality and peaceful co-existence. In the Bill of Rights the right to property is acknowledged as a fundamental right and is it also mentioned that the state must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights. Before the Constitution common law protection for ownership was well established, but no statutory protection for ownership existed. The effect of the property clause (section 25) of the Constitution was that not only ownership, but also other rights to property protected. The property clause prescribes that no one may be deprived of his property, except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property. No fundamental right is absolute with the effect that conflict may arise between the different clauses of the Bill of Rights. A typical example may be where the rights of an owner of immovable come into conflict with another person's right to housing. It must, however, always be borne in mind that no fundamental right is absolute that it is possible, under certain circumstances, to limit a fundamental right. This limitation may also occur in the case of property rights. Certain statutory developments took place since the promulgation of the Constitution. The most important of these developments is of course the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In terms of this Act it is required that certain formalities are to be fulfilled before an unlawful occupier may be evicted from property. The relevant part of the Act is the definition of an illegal occupier. Despite the fact that it was decided in several court cases that an illegal occupier does not include a person who previously had permission to occupy the property, it was decided by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Ndlovu v Ngcobo : Bekker v Jika that the act is applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or a mortgagor who's mortgage has been foreclosed and who now refuses to vacate the property in question. The key findings are that the property concept has developed drastically since the Constitution. In regard to statutory development the most important development was the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which was found to be applicable to all unlawful occupiers of property, regardless of the fact that the occupiers may previously have occupied the property lawfully. The Legal Amendment Bill is to rectify this in order to ensure that the Prevention of lllegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act will no longer be applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or mortgagors who's bond have been called up and who now refuse to vacate the property in question This amendment will bring the (often) conflicting fundamental rights to property and housing into a greater degree of harmony, even though it will not solve all problems. It is the duty of the State to address this and all other potential conflict between different fundamental rights. The method used in this dissertation was the analytical study of statutes, court cases and articles in legal magazines. / Thesis (LL.M. (Estate Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

Summaries in Afrikaans and English / Text in Afrikaans / Die eiendomsklousule soos vervat in Artikel 28(1) van die Grondwet waarborg regte in eiendom. Daar word na die tradisionele eiendomsparadigma verwys, asook die leemtes in die konsep. Die "new property"-konsep word vervolgens in oenskou geneem. Sowel die gemenereg as die inheemse reg word, met verwysing na die begrippe "regte" en "eiendom", behandel. Daarna volg 'n bespreking van die konsep "regte in eiendom", wat die inhoud en omvang van die konsep aandui. In 'n afsonderlike hoofstuk word regte in grand bespreek. Die vraag of 'n konstitusionele reg ten aansien van huisvesting bestaan, geniet oak aandag. Ten slotte word regsvergelykend te werk gegaan en na buitelandse regsbronne verwys wat moontlik in die toekoms 'n rol by die uitleg van die Grondwet kan speel. Daar word gepoog om aan te dui dat die Grondwet as geheel ge"interpreteer en toegepas behoort te word. Die korrekte interpretasie en toepassing van die Grondwet word van uiterste belang beskou ten einde aan die doel van die Grondwet te voldoen. / The property clause is contained in Section 28(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees rights in property. The tradisional property paradigm is referred to, as well as its deficiencies. Thereupon the "new property" concept is taken account of. The common law and the customary law are dealt with, with reference to the concepts "rights" and "property". Subsequently a discussion of the concept "rights in property" follows, denoting this concept's contents and extent. Thereupon rights in land is dealt with. A constitutional right to housing is also attended to. Finally a comparative overview is given with reference to foreign case law, which may in future play a role in the interpretation of the Constitution. Attempts are made to indicate that the Constitution should be interpreted and enforced as a whole. In its correct interpretation and enforcement it is of utmost importance to have due regard to the objects of the Constitution. / Constitutional, International & Indigenous Law / LL.M.

Summaries in Afrikaans and English / Text in Afrikaans / Die eiendomsklousule soos vervat in Artikel 28(1) van die Grondwet waarborg regte in eiendom. Daar word na die tradisionele eiendomsparadigma verwys, asook die leemtes in die konsep. Die "new property"-konsep word vervolgens in oenskou geneem. Sowel die gemenereg as die inheemse reg word, met verwysing na die begrippe "regte" en "eiendom", behandel. Daarna volg 'n bespreking van die konsep "regte in eiendom", wat die inhoud en omvang van die konsep aandui. In 'n afsonderlike hoofstuk word regte in grand bespreek. Die vraag of 'n konstitusionele reg ten aansien van huisvesting bestaan, geniet oak aandag. Ten slotte word regsvergelykend te werk gegaan en na buitelandse regsbronne verwys wat moontlik in die toekoms 'n rol by die uitleg van die Grondwet kan speel. Daar word gepoog om aan te dui dat die Grondwet as geheel ge"interpreteer en toegepas behoort te word. Die korrekte interpretasie en toepassing van die Grondwet word van uiterste belang beskou ten einde aan die doel van die Grondwet te voldoen. / The property clause is contained in Section 28(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees rights in property. The tradisional property paradigm is referred to, as well as its deficiencies. Thereupon the "new property" concept is taken account of. The common law and the customary law are dealt with, with reference to the concepts "rights" and "property". Subsequently a discussion of the concept "rights in property" follows, denoting this concept's contents and extent. Thereupon rights in land is dealt with. A constitutional right to housing is also attended to. Finally a comparative overview is given with reference to foreign case law, which may in future play a role in the interpretation of the Constitution. Attempts are made to indicate that the Constitution should be interpreted and enforced as a whole. In its correct interpretation and enforcement it is of utmost importance to have due regard to the objects of the Constitution. / Constitutional, International and Indigenous Law / LL.M.