Yahoo Web Search

Search results

  1. Malherbe v Ceres Municipality: I t had to be determined whether falling leaves and acorns and protruding branches of trees growing alongside streets constituted a nuisance. The law expects a degree of tolerance between neighbours in the exercise of their entitlements of ownership.

    • (8)
  2. LIMITATIONS ON OWNERSHIP. Case study: Malherbe v Ceres Municipality (AS IN STUDY GUIDE) Facts: Appellant, Malherbe approached court for an interdict ordering respondent, Ceres Municipality, to prevent acorns & leaves of oak trees growing alongside the streets of Ceres, from falling into his property.

    • (4)
  3. In Malherbe v Ceres Municipality 1951 (4) SA 510 A it was confirmed that should a neighbour’s tree branches overhang or the roots spread into your property and the owner refuses to remove same, you may chop them off on the boundary line. Hopefully you will be able to resolve tree-related issues with your neighbour in a courteous way, and ...

  4. The AD's decision in Malherbe v Ceres Municipality 1951 (4) SA 510 (A) is a significant case because it clarifies the law relating to the liability of landowners and municipalities for nuisance. The decision emphasizes that landowners and municipalities have a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent their activities from creating a nuisance to ...

  5. Nkosi & Others v Eggbert Eggs (Pty) Ltd (2007) 28 ILJ 2294 (LC) The employee, Palaza, was dismissed by his employer, Eggbert Eggs. Palaza was popular with fellow employees. 94 of them demanded that he be reinstated and, shortly thereafter, commenced a wildcat strike. In the course of the strike, these workers held a mass protest outside the ...

  6. Malherbe v Ceres Municipality (1) (1951 (4) SA 510 (A)) deals with nuisance of trees and leaves. Facts. The appellant, Malherbe approached the court for an interdict ordering the respondent, Ceres Municipality, to prevent acorns and leaves of oak trees growing alongside the streets of Ceres, from falling onto his property.

  7. People also ask

  8. Bingham v City Council of Johannesburg 1934 WLD 180 Vogel v Crewe and another [2004] 1 All SA 587 (T) Malherbe v Ceres Municipality 1951 (4) SA 510 A. This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice.

  1. People also search for