See the PODCAST below

September-Van Huffel shares that an announcement that the Land Court Bill was approved by cabinet for submission to parliament, was made by both the Minister of Justice, Constitutional Development and Correctional Services and the Minister of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform on 1 March this year. She adds that the Bill will now follow a parliamentary process for the processing and adoption of draft legislation.

With that being said, September-Van Huffel states that there is no certainty as to how long this process may take before the Bill can be signed into law and published in the Government Gazette.

She further adds that the Land Court Bill could have an impact on the effective determination of land disputes in South Africa.

In a joint statement, September-Van Huffel and Horn explain that: “Should the Bill and specifically the proposed provisions in the Bill be properly implemented, this may prove to be an important step towards increasing the effectiveness of land reform and the alleviation of socioeconomic challenges that are closely linked with the unequal distribution of land and land resources.

“The Bill originates from the recommendations of the Presidential Advisory Panel on Land Reform and Agriculture. This panel delivered a thought-provoking and sometimes scathing report on the current state of land reform in South Africa.

“It recommended that the Land Claims Court should become the Land Court, with added powers and functions. An inter-ministerial committee was consequently tasked to oversee the implementation of the recommendations of the advisory panel, which has culminated in the proposed Bill. The Bill seeks to address the backlog of land claims still to be heard by the Land Claims Court and to accelerate the land reform programme as a whole.

“Although the land reform process showed a promising start initially, only modest progress has been made thus far. It is therefore evident that the role and effective functioning of the proposed Land Court and Land Court of Appeal, as set out in the Bill, could be central to the future success of the land reform programme.”

Furthermore, Van Huffel says the Land Court Bill suggests the establishment of a specialist Land Court and Land Court of Appeal. The Land Court will be equivalent to a High Court and the Land Court of Appeal will be equivalent to that of the Supreme Court of Appeal. The prospect of a specialist Land Court of Appeal is an exciting prospect for legal practitioners, says Van Huffel, as this will mean the development of land specific jurisprudence that can be relied upon as precedent.

“Although it is too early in the process to pronounce on the success of this proposed legislation, the Bill is welcomed as a step in the right direction to address the culminating land-reform crisis. The reality is that the current land-reform system is intrinsically flawed and untenable. There are too many land-related disputes for the existing Land Claims Court in its present form to adjudicate on.

“Furthermore the complexity of the legal disputes is overburdening the administrative function and the capacity of the DALRRD. More than half of the recommendations made by the advisory panel are related to the functions of DALRRD. It is, therefore, no surprise that it appears that the proposed specialist land courts will assume control of certain functions that have been crippling the department’s administration.

“In our opinion, the Bill will therefore enhance the jurisdictional powers of the court to successfully deal with all three processes related to land reform and consequently jurisprudence on land-reform matters could be strengthened whilst the application of sound legal and economic principles can be ensured,” the statement concludes.                  

OFM News