Institutional Repository

Bebouing (inaedificatio) in die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg – ’n regsvergelykende studie

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Scott, Susan (Susanna Johanna)
dc.contributor.author Knobel, Ina Magdalena
dc.date.accessioned 2016-10-27T12:10:30Z
dc.date.available 2016-10-27T12:10:30Z
dc.date.issued 2016-09
dc.date.submitted 2016-10-27
dc.identifier.citation Knobel, Ina Magdalena (2016) Bebouing (inaedificatio) in die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg – ’n regsvergelykende studie, University of South Africa, Pretoria, <http://hdl.handle.net/10500/21718> en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10500/21718
dc.description.abstract Hierdie proefskrif handel oor aspekte van inaedificatio (bebouing) in die Suid-Afrikaanse, Engelse en Nederlandse reg. Die klem val op die maatstawwe wat aangewend word om te bepaal of aanhegting van ‘n roerende saak aan ‘n onroerende saak plaasgevind het. Die maatstawwe in die drie stelsels toon ooreenkomste en verskille. Een ooreenkoms is dat die graad en wyse van aanhegting in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg oorweeg word, terwyl daar in die Engelse reg slegs na die graad van aanhegting gekyk word. In die Nederlandse reg word ’n duursame verbinding vereis om te bepaal of bestanddeelvorming plaasgevind het, en word gevra of verwydering van die saak sonder beskadiging kan plaasvind. In die Suid-Afrikaanse reg word die doel van die aangehegte saak oorweeg, hoewel Innes HR dit nie in MacDonald Ltd v Radin NO & The Potchefstroom Dairies & Industries Co Ltd so formuleer nie. Die aard van die roerende saak word in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg oorweeg, terwyl die aard en ontwerp van die roerende saak in die Nederlandse reg oorweeg word. In die Engelse reg word die doel waarvoor die aanhegting gemaak is oorweeg om die bedoeling met die aanhegting te bepaal. Die vraag is of die saak vir die permanente en substansiële verbetering van die gebou (grond) aangeheg is, of vir ’n tydelike doel of vir die beter benutting van die chattel. Die Nederlandse reg beklemtoon die bestemming van die aanhegting. Die opvallendste verskil tussen die Suid-Afrikaanse reg en die ander twee stelsels is die belang van die subjektiewe bedoeling van een of ander betrokkene. Die regsposisie van huurders wat sake aanheg verskil van dié van ander aanhegters. In al drie regstelsels kan huurders voor afloop van die huurtermyn sommige aangehegte sake verwyder, mits die huurgrond in dieselfde toestand gelaat word as waarin dit was voor die aanhegting. Die drie stelsels vertoon verskille soos dat onsekerheid bestaan oor wie die eienaar van die aangehegte sake is voor verwydering. In die Engelse reg heg bedryfsaanhegtings en ornamentele aanhegtings, nie aan nie. Ingevolge die Nederlandse reg is die verhuurder gedurende die huurtermyn eienaar van die aanhegtings, aangesien aanhegting plaasvind sodra die roerende sake aan die huurgrond heg. Die Suid-Afrikaanse reg hieroor is onduidelik. af
dc.description.abstract This thesis deals with aspects of inaedificatio (building) in South African, English and Dutch law. The emphasis falls on the criteria that are applied to determine whether attachment of a movable to an immovable thing occurred. The criteria in the three systems show similarities and differences. One similarity is that in South African law the degree and manner of attachment are considered, while in English law only the degree of attachment is considered. To determine whether one thing became a component part of another thing (bestanddeelvorming) a durable connection is required In Dutch law. The question is whether removal can take place without causing damage. The purpose of the attached thing is considered in South African law, although Innes CJ did not formulate this criterion in this manner in MacDonald Ltd v Radin NO & The Potchefstroom Dairies & Industries Co Ltd. The nature of the movable thing is relevant, while the nature and design of the movable thing are considered in Dutch law. In English law the purpose of the attachment is considered to determine the intention with the attachment. The question is whether the thing was attached for the permanent and substantial improvement of the building (land) or for a temporary purpose or for the better use of the chattel. The destination (bestemming) of the attachment is considered in Dutch law. The most significant difference between South African law and the other two systems is the importance of the subjective intention of some person involved in the situation. The legal position of lessees who attach movales differs from that of other persons who make such attachments. In all three legal systems lessees may remove certain attached movables before the expiry of the term of lease as long as the leased land is left in the same condition that it was in before the attachment. The three systems also differs for example it is not certain who the owner of the attached things is before removal of the attachments. In English law trade and ornamental fixtures do not attach. In Dutch law the lessor is the owner of the attachments during the term of lease, because attachment takes place when the movable things are fixed to the leased land. The position in South African law on this is unclear. en
dc.format.extent 1 online resource (7 unnumbered pages, iv, 367 leaves) en
dc.language.iso Afrikaans en
dc.subject Building en
dc.subject Bebouing af
dc.subject Inaedificatio
dc.subject Natrekking af
dc.subject Oorspronklike eiendomsverkryging af
dc.subject Superficies solo cedit
dc.subject Omne quod inaedificatur solo cedit
dc.subject Roerende saak af
dc.subject Onroerende saak af
dc.subject Chattel en
dc.subject Fixture en
dc.subject Accession en
dc.subject Original acquisition of ownership en
dc.subject Movable thing en
dc.subject Immovable thing en
dc.subject.ddc 346.43
dc.subject.lcsh Fixtures (Law) -- South Africa -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Fixtures (Law) -- Great Britain -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Fixtures (Law) -- Netherlands -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Appurtenances -- South Africa -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Appurtenances -- Great Britain -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Appurtenances -- Netherlands -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Real property -- South Africa -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Real property -- Great Britain -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Real property -- Netherlands -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Landlord and tenant -- South Africa -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Landlord and tenant -- Great Britain -- Case studies en
dc.subject.lcsh Landlord and tenant -- Netherlands -- Case studies en
dc.title Bebouing (inaedificatio) in die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg – ’n regsvergelykende studie en
dc.type Thesis en
dc.description.department Private Law en
dc.description.degree LL. D.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search UnisaIR


Browse

My Account

Statistics