Property Reporter

THE Constitutional Court has rejected the Ethekwini Municipality's application for leave to appeal against a recent Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that the view from a house is integral to the value of the property.

Now that the Constitutional Court has, in effect, upheld the ruling, more weight will be added to actions by other homeowners, who feel their rights have been infringed.

The Constitutional Court ruled last week that the municipality had no reasonable prospects on appeal and decided it was not in the interests of justice to grant the leave to appeal.

Business Day reported early last month that the Supreme Court of Appeal had been called upon by Durbanbased attorneys Livingston Leandy, acting on behalf Greg Paola, to decide whether the proposed alteration of a neighbour's property, which impaired the view and diminished the value of Paola's property, was prohibited.

Kay Naidoo, of Livingston Leandy, said Paola's neighbours planned to go up one storey. The proposal meant the extension would have impaired Paola's view , which covered Burman Bush, Umgeni River and the sea. The court decided the case in favour of Paola.

The court said the local authority was obliged to have appointed a building control officer, who would make recommendations to the authority before it approved the plans.

The Ethekwini municipality had not appointed a building control officer for 17 months.

The court held that the failure of the local authority to appoint an officer resulted in there being no valid approval for the plans.

The municipality applied for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court against the judgment as it contended that the Supreme Court of Appeal should have held that the loss of view from a property was not a factor that should be regarded when determining the value of neighbouring properties.

Nov 17 2003 07:26:40:000AM Nick Wilson Business Day 1st Edition