SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

MEDIA SUMMARY – JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF APPEAL

FROM
The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal
DATE
28 November 2018
STATUS
Immediate

Tembu Convenience Centre CC & another v City of Johannesburg &
others (270/2018) [2018] ZASCA 160 (28 November 2018)

Please note that the media summary is intended for the benefit of the media
and does not form part of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court of Appeal (the SCA) today dismissed an appeal against a
judgment of the Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg, of the High Court in
terms whereof that court dismissed an action by the appellants for damages in
terms of s 67(4) of the Local Government Ordinance 17 of 1939 (Gauteng).

The first appellant conducted a service station business on the north-west
corner of the intersection between Mooki Street and the Soweto Highway.
During 2008-2009 the first respondent, the City of Johannesburg, caused
dedicated bus lanes to be created in Mooki Street for use by its Re Vaya
buses. The same number of lanes continued to exist as before. However in
each direction one lane (the inner lane) was reserved for the exclusive use of
buses. Rumbling blocks or crash barriers separated outer mixed-traffic lanes
from the inner bus lanes, and a constructed median island separated the
opposing bus lanes from each other. These works had the effect that mixed

traffic travelling on Mooki Street in a westerly direction could not make a right
turn across oncoming traffic in order to reach the service station. Similarly,
traffic entering Mooki Street from side roads to the south could not travel
across Mooki Street and turn right towards the service station. If such vehicles
wished to reach the service station, they would need to travel about 500 m
further west and use a traffic circle to turn back onto Mooki Street in an
easterly direction.
The question was whether these works resulted in a partial closure of Mooki
Street within the meaning of s 67 of the Ordinance. Only if this were the case
would the first appellant have been entitled to claim damages. The court a
quo answered the question in the negative and the SCA agreed. The SCA
held that a street can only be said to be partially closed if a part of the street
permanently ceases to be available for use by all traffic. In the present case,
the dedicated bus lanes were not closed to all traffic, remaining open for use
by Rea Vaya buses. The fact that mixed traffic travelling in a westerly
direction could not enter the inner westerly bus lane, and thus could not cross
over to the other side of Mooki Street, did not mean that any part of the street
had been closed to all traffic. The dedication of the bus lane, whether
achieved through traffic signs, painted lines or physical barriers, was a matter
of traffic flow and did not involve a street closure.
~~ ends~~