Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

No driver’s licence, no job: South Africa’s quiet barrier to youth employment

July 9, 2026

Email seeking lower house price costs buyers R224,952 despite signed agreement

July 9, 2026

Judge rejects woman’s bid to validate disputed Will signed by thumbprint

July 9, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • No driver’s licence, no job: South Africa’s quiet barrier to youth employment
  • Email seeking lower house price costs buyers R224,952 despite signed agreement
  • Judge rejects woman’s bid to validate disputed Will signed by thumbprint
  • Judge President Phatudi found guilty of judicial misconduct for not stepping aside from case
  • Former Robben Island Museum CFO loses pension payout amid alleged CV fraud
  • Eskom ordered to pay full legal costs in R8.2 million electrocution settlement dispute
  • Lesedi Municipality’s escalating debt to Rand Water: Dry taps and protests in Ratanda
  • Labour Court finds CPUT unfairly dismissed long-serving employee for ill health
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Tshwane fails to reclaim Ga-Rankuwa and Mabopane properties
Civil Law

Tshwane fails to reclaim Ga-Rankuwa and Mabopane properties

High Court finds City was never meant to own disputed properties and confirms Valambya's ownership.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliMarch 19, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • The court finds that the City was never meant to be the permanent owner of the properties.
  • Transfers are held to be conditional and linked to the township registration process.
  • The City’s claim is dismissed, and Valambya is confirmed as the legal owner of all four properties.

The City of Tshwane has lost its attempt to reclaim four properties in Ga-Rankuwa, Mabopane, and Kudube. The High Court in Pretoria dismissed the City’s claim and confirmed Valambya Energy Services and Projects (Pty) Ltd as the legal owner.

The City had taken action against Shell South Africa Refining (Pty) Ltd, the North West Provincial Government, Engen Petroleum Limited, Valambya Energy Services and Projects (Pty) Ltd, the North West Housing Corporation, and the Registrar of Deeds. It sought to have several property transfers declared unlawful and set aside.

The main issue was whether the transfers complied with the Municipal Finance Management Act and related regulatory rules. The City argued that the transfers were illegal because there was no council resolution, no public participation process, and no following of the rules for disposing of municipal assets. The court did not agree with this perspective and found that the case could not be seen as a simple municipal property dispute.

Judge MP Kumalo emphasised that the issue was not a common transfer of municipal properties. He pointed out that this case needed to consider the relevant history.

Background and competing claims

The City claimed it became the legal owner of the properties as the successor to the Mabopane Transitional Representative Council. Based on this claim, it sought orders to declare the transfer of Portion 7 of the farm Mabopane 702 JR to the North West Housing Corporation unlawful, along with the transfers of erven in Ga-Rankuwa Unit 4 and Unit 5 to Valambya Energy Services and Projects (Pty) Ltd.

Valambya opposed the claim and filed a counterclaim, seeking a court order to confirm its ownership of all four properties and to require the City to complete the outstanding transfers. Valambya argued that the properties were never supposed to belong permanently to the City and were transferred as part of a broader effort to establish townships and pass ownership to the intended beneficiaries.

Evidence showed that the properties originally came from the former Bophuthatswana government and were later handled through transitional arrangements involving the North West Housing Corporation and various state entities. A task team made up of members from the City, provincial governments, and the housing corporation was formed to manage the transfer of both residential and commercial properties.

Court rejects City’s case

The City focused on the lack of a council resolution and other compliance issues to claim that the transfers were invalid. An expert witness for the City testified that the transactions did not meet the requirements set out in the Municipal Finance Management Act and related regulations.

The court did not find this persuasive. Judge Kumalo ruled that the expert’s opinion on the legal questions was not acceptable, stating that “her expert opinion is, with respect, inadmissible.” The court determined that the evidence did not sufficiently consider the historical context of the transfers.

A key finding was that the City was never meant to be the permanent owner of the properties. Judge Kumalo stated, “It is clear from the evidence that the City was never intended to be the permanent owner of these properties,” and “the transfers were conditional and for the purpose of establishing township registers.”

The court also noted that the City was not merely a bystander. Its representatives participated in the task team and were involved in the process without raising any objections at the time. As Judge Kumalo remarked, “The Plaintiff, through its representatives in the Task Team, participated in these transfers.”

Regarding the legal basis of the claim, the court found that the City had simply chosen the wrong legal approach. Judge Kumalo remarked that the City “ought then to have reviewed itself and brought a review application rather than a rei vindicatio.”

The court also found no evidence to suggest that the transactions were tainted by fraud or wrongdoing, stating plainly that “there is no evidence suggesting fraudulent conduct or impropriety.”

Order and implications

The court dismissed the City’s claim entirely and declared Valambya Energy Services and Projects (Pty) Ltd the legal owner of all four properties: erven in Ga-Rankuwa Unit 4 and Unit 5, Mabopane Unit B, and Kudube Unit 2.

The City was ordered to take all necessary actions, including signing the required documents, to transfer the remaining properties within 120 days. The court also stated that Valambya is entitled to all rental income earned from the properties, both past and future, and ordered the City to pay for Valambya’s legal costs, including fees for both senior and junior counsel.

Judge Kumalo concluded, “In these circumstances, the transaction cannot be declared invalid.”

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

 

City of Tshwane High Court Pretoria MFMA Property ownership Valambya Energy
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Eskom ordered to pay full legal costs in R8.2 million electrocution settlement dispute

July 9, 2026

Woman shot four times by police awarded R650 000 for unlawful arrest and assault

July 8, 2026

Judge finds four RAF claims shared troubling similarities, rejects settlement agreements

July 7, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 10   +   5   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

June 2, 2025
Don't Miss
Opinion
6 Mins Read

No driver’s licence, no job: South Africa’s quiet barrier to youth employment

By Nomaswazi NkosiJuly 9, 20266 Mins Read

Nomaswazi Nkosi explores why a driver’s licence has become an overlooked requirement separating many qualified South African graduates from their first job.

Email seeking lower house price costs buyers R224,952 despite signed agreement

July 9, 2026

Judge rejects woman’s bid to validate disputed Will signed by thumbprint

July 9, 2026

Judge President Phatudi found guilty of judicial misconduct for not stepping aside from case

July 9, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
OUR PICKS

Trustees clamp down on Airbnb rentals pending owners’ final decision at February AGM

July 7, 2026

Foreign national married to South African wins citizenship, Home Affairs found in contempt

July 3, 2026

Labour Court says CCMA cannot block expert evidence in workplace alcohol dismissal disputes

July 3, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
►
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
►
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
►
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
►
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
►
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by