SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL RULES THAT THE VOESTOOTS CLAUSE PROTECTS SELLER FROM ABSENCE OF APPROVED PLANS
ODENDAAL V FERRARIS
FACTS
- Ferraris purchased a property from Talita Odendaal. After he moved in on 30 June 2006 and before the transfer was registered Ferraris discovered various defects in the property. Amongst others, the outbuilding ceilings had considerable water damage and had partially collapsed and there was a sewer manhole in the laundry.
- Ferraris attended to the municipality and found that;
- the sellers’ predecessor in title had obtained approval for the outbuilding in March 2000, but only as a storeroom and subject to the condition that the sewer was rerouted so as to comply with municipal town planning regulations, which was never done
- and that on three different occasions the municipality had rejected building plans submitted for the carport, which did not comply with the National Building Regulations and building Standards Act 103 of 1977 as it transgressed the 1.5 meter building line applicable to property zoned “residential 1”
- Due to Ferraris referring the above issues to FNB, FNB instructed their attorneys not to proceed with the bond registration.
