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.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/18004 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Marais, Ernst Jacobus |
| Contributors | Van der Walt, A. J., Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Public Law. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en_ZA |
| Detected Language | Unknown |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | ix, 331 p. |
| Rights | Stellenbosch University |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds