Resolving the tension between the section 25 Right to Property and section 26 Right to Housing The Constitutional Court of South Africa subsidiarity methodology

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Brand, Danie (Jacobus Frederick Daniel, 1968- ) en
dc.contributor.postgraduate Mosalagae, Refhilwe en
dc.date.accessioned 2016-06-14T09:45:13Z
dc.date.available 2016-06-14T09:45:13Z
dc.date.created 2016-04-14 en
dc.date.issued 2016 en
dc.description Mini Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2016. en
dc.description.abstract In this dissertation, I identify the tension between the s25 right to property and s26 right to access to adequate housing. This tension is a result of the historical narrative of the Republic of South Africa where forced evictions were a weapon in the arsenal of Apartheid and the common law right of property was practised in a discriminatory manner. With the advent of a constitutional dispensation four sources of law were created. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 as the supreme law of the nation, from which all other laws derive their legitimacy; legislation enacted by parliament; common law and to a limited extent indigenous law. Further, how the Constitutional Court deals with the different sources of law in eviction cases has an impact on the outcome of the case. The subsidiarity methodology entails that when deciding a given matter one first looks to the legislation enacted to give effect to a right in the Bill of Rights; if the matter is not adequately covered by legislation, the courts consider the common law and only if the constitutional validity of the legislation is attacked does one make direct resort to a right in the Bill of Rights. I argue that the subsidiarity methodology is the most appropriate tool to assist the courts in dealing with the various sources of law from analysing CC eviction cases from 2007 to 2015. The implications of this dissertation are the that constitutional adjudication needs to develop the subsidiarity methodology further and that academic commentary should do same. en
dc.description.availability Unrestricted en
dc.description.degree LLM en
dc.description.department Public Law en
dc.identifier.citation Mosalagae, R 2016, Resolving the tension between the section 25 Right to Property and section 26 Right to Housing The Constitutional Court of South Africa subsidiarity methodology, LLM Mini Dissertation, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, viewed yymmdd <http://hdl.handle.net/2263/53163> en
dc.identifier.other A2016 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/53163
dc.language.iso en en
dc.publisher University of Pretoria en_ZA
dc.rights © 2016 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria. en
dc.subject UCTD en
dc.title Resolving the tension between the section 25 Right to Property and section 26 Right to Housing The Constitutional Court of South Africa subsidiarity methodology en
dc.type Mini Dissertation en


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record