Maryna holds the BA, LLB, LLM degrees and is a Director at the Cape Town branch of STBB. She is an admitted Attorney, Notary Public, Conveyancer and Insolvency Practitioner with many years of experience in the fields of property law, conveyancing and the laws relating to corporate compliance (especially in respect of the FICA and POPIA laws). Up until 2018 she was also head of the firm’s national marketing portfolio. She is a seasoned public speaker and presenter, both in person and online. She prepares text for the majority of STBB’s internal and external publications and is editor and co-writer for two pivotal publications in the South African real estate industry – the ABC of Conveyancing (JUTA) and Delport’s South African Property Law and Practice (JUTA).

Property Law Update | Issue 34 – 2015

SALE OF FARM LAND: BEWARE THE PITFALLS

Le Roux v Brits (4070/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 133 (18 September 2015)

This judgment deals with the initial skirmishing between a seller and purchaser, the former seeking return of farm land that was transferred to the purchaser in terms of a deed of sale that incorrectly referred to the whole of the farm being sold, when the intention was only to sell that part of the land that the farmer had pointed out to the purchaser. What became problematic was the fact that the alleged intention to sell a portion only would render the agreement non-compliant with the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act, as there was no ministerial consent. Should the seller have asked the court for rectification of the agreement which would have resulted in an invalid agreement?

read more
The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment

 

SELLING A PORTION OF A FARM WITHOUT MINISTER’S CONSENT – RISKY

Four Arrows Investments 68 v Abigail Construction (20470/2014) [2015] ZASCA 121
(17 September 2015)

Property practitioners should take care when assisting parties in agreements relating to agricultural land! In a technically complicated agreement, the seller and purchaser in this matter agreed to the sale of a portion of agricultural land once the Minister’s consent, as required in the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act, was obtained. The agreement also included a “deemed option” to acquire the land. The Appeal Court held that whether framed as an option or a sale subject to a suspensive condition, in the absence of the requisite Ministerial consent, the agreement was void.

read more
The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment

For the best legal advice and personalised service, let's talk
Subscribe to our monthly newsletters, subscribe